Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
Vegans are bad for environment (Read 1884 times)
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Vegans are bad for environment
Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:43am
 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-18/eating-lettuce-three-times-worse-for-envir...

Turns out you really don't make friends with salad.

US scientists have released a new study which claims eating salad is worse for the environment than eating meat.

The new research from Carnegie Mellon University — published in the journal Environment Systems and Decisions — states current recommendations to incorporate more fruits, vegetables, dairy and seafood in a diet could be worse for the environment.

Key points

New study looked at water, energy and greenhouse gases used to produce food
Study used three diet scenarios and how they impacted the environment
Vegetables required more resources per calorie to produce on to the plate
The study measured energy use, how much water is needed and greenhouse gas emissions right the way through the food chain.

It used the US dietary guidelines to look at a shift from current food consumption patterns to three dietary scenarios and how that impacted the environment.

Researchers looked at how growing, processing and transporting food, sales and service, and household storage could impact the environment.

Researcher Paul Fischbeck said eating lettuce was three times worse for greenhouse gas emission than eating bacon.

"Lots of common vegetables require more resources per calorie than you would think," he said.

"Eggplant, celery and cucumbers look particularly bad when compared to pork or chicken."

In the first scenario, the impact of food production on the environment could be lessened if people simply ate less of what they already do. Shifting from a high-calorie diet to a reduced calorie diet - that path found a 9 per cent decrease in energy use, water footprint and emissions.

The second scenario involved maintaining calorie intake, but adjusting foods to incorporate more fruits, vegetables, dairy and seafood. That scenario would see an increase of 43 per cent in energy, 16 per cent in water footprint and emission rise by 11 per cent.

The third scenario took the greatest toll on the environment, where calories were reduced and switched to a diet with more vegetables and less meat. That resulted in 38 per cent increase in energy, 10 per cent in water footprint and 6 per cent in gas emissions.

The researchers claimed there was "a complex relationship between diet and the environment".

"What is good for us health-wise isn't always what's best for the environment," the study revealed.

"That is important for public officials to know and for them to be cognisant of these tradeoffs as they develop or continue to develop dietary guidelines in the future."

The study has become an interesting turn for "bacon lovers", after the World Health Organisation warned processed meats like bacon, sausages and hot dogs caused colon cancer.

Critics of the new study said the research only looked at "calorie-for-calorie" comparison, for example 100 calories of bacon, versus 100 calories of lettuce.
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35522
Gender: female
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #1 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:59am
 
Oh for crying out loud. Calorie for calorie. Of course there are more calories in meat than in lettuce. You don't eat the equivalent calories of fruits and vegetables that you do of meat.

What a ridiculous study.
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Stratos
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4725
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #2 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:11am
 
Food with no calories performs badly in study comparing calorie efficiency, shocker.
Back to top
 

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15th, 2014 at 11:24pm:
Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49322
At my desk.
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #3 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:19am
 
What food has no calories?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Stratos
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4725
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #4 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:24am
 
freediver wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:19am:
What food has no calories?


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hyperbole
Back to top
 

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15th, 2014 at 11:24pm:
Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #5 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:45am
 
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:59am:
Oh for crying out loud. Calorie for calorie. Of course there are more calories in meat than in lettuce. You don't eat the equivalent calories of fruits and vegetables that you do of meat.

What a ridiculous study.


But it's the same argument used with the "emission per capita"
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
athos
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Re-educate barbarians

Posts: 6406
Hong Kong
Gender: male
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #6 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:07am
 
Oh my goodness. How can you trust US scientists?. We now they are all corrupted.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:12am by athos »  

Do we need to be always politically correct.
In the world of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35522
Gender: female
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #7 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:40am
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:45am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:59am:
Oh for crying out loud. Calorie for calorie. Of course there are more calories in meat than in lettuce. You don't eat the equivalent calories of fruits and vegetables that you do of meat.

What a ridiculous study.


But it's the same argument used with the "emission per capita"




No. It's not.
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #8 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:48am
 
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:40am:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:45am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:59am:
Oh for crying out loud. Calorie for calorie. Of course there are more calories in meat than in lettuce. You don't eat the equivalent calories of fruits and vegetables that you do of meat.

What a ridiculous study.


But it's the same argument used with the "emission per capita"




No. It's not.


Yes you are
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35522
Gender: female
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #9 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am
 
Yes i am?
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
John_Taverner
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #10 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:01am
 
Who commissioned the study? The meat industry?

Right, so this is based on substituting meat for say lettuce. Instead of say, a 500gram steak for your meal, you'd eat 8.3 kilograms of lettuce to get the equivalent calories.


Good luck with that.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:08am by John_Taverner »  
72+Adelaide+Street  
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #11 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:02am
 
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am:
Yes i am?


You said there are more calories in meat than in lettuce and you don't eat the equivalent of calories in fruit and veg compared to meat.

Environmentalists are saying Australia (meat) emits more carbon (calories) than 3rd world countries (lettuce) therefore Australia should reduce its carbon emissions.
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35522
Gender: female
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #12 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:07am
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:02am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am:
Yes i am?


You said there are more calories in meat than in lettuce and you don't eat the equivalent of calories in fruit and veg compared to meat.

Environmentalists are saying Australia (meat) emits more carbon (calories) than 3rd world countries (lettuce) therefore Australia should reduce its carbon emissions.



That is a preposterous argument Maqqa. Did you think that all the way through?

Australia is the 15th largest emitter of Carbon in the world. We are not the 15th most populated country. We need to reduce our footprint.
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #13 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:18am
 
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:07am:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:02am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am:
Yes i am?


You said there are more calories in meat than in lettuce and you don't eat the equivalent of calories in fruit and veg compared to meat.

Environmentalists are saying Australia (meat) emits more carbon (calories) than 3rd world countries (lettuce) therefore Australia should reduce its carbon emissions.



That is a preposterous argument Maqqa. Did you think that all the way through?

Australia is the 15th largest emitter of Carbon in the world. We are not the 15th most populated country. We need to reduce our footprint.


18th - but lets not split hair on this point

Total human emission is 35,700,000

Australia's emission is 410,000

The environmentalist have not pushed the "per capital" argument for years now

Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35522
Gender: female
Re: Vegans are bad for environment
Reply #14 - Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:26am
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:18am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:07am:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 10:02am:
mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am:
Yes i am?


You said there are more calories in meat than in lettuce and you don't eat the equivalent of calories in fruit and veg compared to meat.

Environmentalists are saying Australia (meat) emits more carbon (calories) than 3rd world countries (lettuce) therefore Australia should reduce its carbon emissions.



That is a preposterous argument Maqqa. Did you think that all the way through?

Australia is the 15th largest emitter of Carbon in the world. We are not the 15th most populated country. We need to reduce our footprint.


18th - but lets not split hair on this point

Total human emission is 35,700,000

Australia's emission is 410,000

The environmentalist have not pushed the "per capital" argument for years now




Do you even know what you are rabbiting on about?
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print