Saving the Earth, One Bite at a Time

Our planet has become a toxic dumping ground. Our water is
contaminated. Our air is filled with pollutants. And our soil has been
depleted of vital nutrients. In this time of crisis, many wonder what
can be done to protect our environment. Fortunately, each of us can
make a difference … every time we sit down to eat.

"The threat of pollution from intensive livestock and poultry farms is
a national problem." —- U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Report(1)


Becoming Vegetarian for the Planet

Getting our food from farmed animals is inefficient. It takes much
more land, water, and energy to produce meat, eggs, and dairy products
than vegetarian foods. The United Nations reports that animal farming
damages natural habitats, produces greenhouse gases, erodes our soil,
depletes our aquifers, and contaminates our water.(2)

"Much as we have awakened to the full economic and social costs of
cigarettes, we will find we can no longer...ignore the costs of mass-
producing cattle, poultry, pigs, sheep and fish to feed our growing
population. These costs include hugely inefficient use of freshwater
and land, heavy pollution from livestock feces…and spreading
destruction of the forests on which much of our planet's life
depends." —- TIME Magazine Report, Visions of the 21st Century, "Will
We Still Eat Meat?"


Make a Difference for the Planet. Start Today.

Protect the environment with every bite you take! Request your free
Vegetarian Starter Guide (http://www.tryveg.com/) and make the
transition to vegetarian eating with ease. Practical tips, dozens of
delicious recipes, a vegetarian nutrition section, the best in
vegetarian cookbooks, frequently asked questions, and much more. In
need of some animal- and earth-friendly recipes? Visit
http://www.vegrecipes.org. Bon appétit!


References

Animal Waste Pollution in America: An Emerging National Problem,
Minority Staff of Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition &
Forestry, 104th Congress, Dec. 1997.
Livestock & the Environment: Finding a Balance, a report coordinated
by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1996.

<not empty body>

http://chetday.com/vegmyths.htm

"Along with the unjustified and unscientific saturated fat and cholesterol
scares of the past several decades has come the notion that vegetarianism is
a healthier dietary option for people. It seems as if every health expert
and government health agency is urging people to eat fewer animal products
and consume more vegetables, grains, fruits and legumes. Along with these
exhortations have come assertions and studies supposedly proving that
vegetarianism is healthier for people and that meat consumption is
associated with sickness and death. Several authorities, however, have
questioned these data, but their objections have been largely ignored.
"As we shall see, many of the vegetarian claims cannot be substantiated and
some are simply false and dangerous. There are benefits to vegetarian diets
for certain health conditions, and some people function better on less fat
and protein, but, as a practitioner who has dealt with several former
vegetarians and vegans (total vegetarians), I know full well the dangerous
effects of a diet devoid of healthful animal products. It is my hope that
all readers will more carefully evaluate their position on vegetarianism
after reading this paper.

MYTH #1: Meat consumption contributes to famine and depletes the Earth's
natural resources.

"Some vegetarians have claimed that livestock require pasturage that could
be used to farm grains to feed starving people in Third World countries. It
is also claimed that feeding animals contributes to world hunger because
livestock are eating foods that could go to feed humans. The solution to
world hunger, therefore, is for people to become vegetarians. These
arguments are illogical and simplistic.

"The first argument ignores the fact that about 2/3 of our Earth's dry land
is unsuitable for farming. It is primarily the open range, desert and
mountainous areas that provide food to grazing animals and that land is
currently being put to good use (1).

"The second argument is faulty as well because it ignores the vital
contributions that livestock animals make to humanity's well-being. It is
also misleading to think that the foods grown and given to feed livestock
could be diverted to feed humans:

"Agricultural animals have always made a major contribution to the welfare
of human societies by providing food, shelter, fuel, fertilizer and other
products and services. They are a renewable resource, and utilize another
renewable resource, plants, to produce these products and services. In
addition, the manure produced by the animals helps improve soil fertility
and, thus, aids the plants. In some developing countries the manure cannot
be utilized as a fertilizer but is dried as a source of fuel.

"There are many who feel that because the world population is growing at a
faster rate than is the food supply, we are becoming less and less able to
afford animal foods because feeding plant products to animals is an
inefficient use of potential human food. It is true that it is more
efficient for humans to eat plant products directly rather than to allow
animals to convert them to human food. At best, animals only produce one
pound or less of human food for each three pounds of plants eaten. However,
this inefficiency only applies to those plants and plant products that the
human can utilize. The fact is that over two-thirds of the feed fed to
animals consists of substances that are either undesirable or completely
unsuited for human food. Thus, by their ability to convert inedible plant
materials to human food, animals not only do not compete with the human
rather they aid greatly in improving both the quantity and the quality of
the diets of human societies. (2)

"Furthermore, at the present time, there is more than enough food grown in
the world to feed all people on the planet. The problem is widespread
poverty making it impossible for the starving poor to afford it. In a
comprehensive report, the Population Reference Bureau attributed the world
hunger problem to poverty, not meat-eating (3). It also did not consider
mass vegetarianism to be a solution for world hunger.

"What would actually happen, however, if animal husbandry were abandoned in
favor of mass agriculture, brought about by humanity turning towards
vegetarianism?

"If a large number of people switched to vegetarianism, the demand for meat
in the United States and Europe would fall, the supply of grain would
dramatically increase, but the buying power of poor [starving] people in
Africa and Asia wouldn't change at all.

"The result would be very predictable -- there would be a mass exodus from
farming. Whereas today the total amount of grains produced could feed 10
billion people, the total amount of grain grown in this post-meat world
would likely fall back to about 7 or 8 billion. The trend of farmers selling
their land to developers and others would accelerate quickly. (4)

"In other words, there would be less food available for the world to eat.
Furthermore, the monoculture of grains and legumes, which is what would
happen if animal husbandry were abandoned and the world relied exclusively
on plant foods for its food, would rapidly deplete the soil and require the
heavy use of artificial fertilizers, one ton of which requires ten tons of
crude oil to produce (5).

"As far as the impact to our environment, a closer look reveals the great
damage that exclusive and mass farming would do. British organic dairy
farmer and researcher Mark Purdey wisely points out that if "veganic
agricultural systems were to gain a foothold on the soil, then agrochemical
use, soil erosion, cash cropping, prairie-scapes and ill health would
escalate." (6)

"Neanderthin author Ray Audette concurs with this view:

"Since ancient times, the most destructive factor in the degradation of the
environment has been monoculture agriculture. The production of wheat in
ancient Sumeria transformed once-fertile plains into salt flats that remain
sterile 5,000 years later. As well as depleting both the soil and water
sources, monoculture agriculture also produces environmental damage by
altering the delicate balance of natural ecosystems. World rice production
in 1993, for instance, caused 155 million cases of malaria by providing
breeding grounds for mosquitoes in the paddies. Human contact with ducks in
the same rice paddies resulted in 500 million cases of influenza during the
same year.(7) "

Once I stepped in dogshit right after getting new sneakers.


> http://chetday.com/vegmyths.htm
>
> "Along with the unjustified and unscientific saturated fat and cholesterol
> scares of the past several decades has come the notion that vegetarianism is
> a healthier dietary option for people. It seems as if every health expert
> and government health agency is urging people to eat fewer animal products
> and consume more vegetables, grains, fruits and legumes. Along with these
> exhortations have come assertions and studies supposedly proving that
> vegetarianism is healthier for people and that meat consumption is
> associated with sickness and death. Several authorities, however, have
> questioned these data, but their objections have been largely ignored.
> "As we shall see, many of the vegetarian claims cannot be substantiated and
> some are simply false and dangerous. There are benefits to vegetarian diets
> for certain health conditions, and some people function better on less fat
> and protein, but, as a practitioner who has dealt with several former
> vegetarians and vegans (total vegetarians), I know full well the dangerous
> effects of a diet devoid of healthful animal products. It is my hope that
> all readers will more carefully evaluate their position on vegetarianism
> after reading this paper.
>
> MYTH #1: Meat consumption contributes to famine and depletes the Earth's
> natural resources.
>
> "Some vegetarians have claimed that livestock require pasturage that could
> be used to farm grains to feed starving people in Third World countries. It
> is also claimed that feeding animals contributes to world hunger because
> livestock are eating foods that could go to feed humans. The solution to
> world hunger, therefore, is for people to become vegetarians. These
> arguments are illogical and simplistic.
>
> "The first argument ignores the fact that about 2/3 of our Earth's dry land
> is unsuitable for farming. It is primarily the open range, desert and
> mountainous areas that provide food to grazing animals and that land is
> currently being put to good use (1).
>
> "The second argument is faulty as well because it ignores the vital
> contributions that livestock animals make to humanity's well-being. It is
> also misleading to think that the foods grown and given to feed livestock
> could be diverted to feed humans:
>
> "Agricultural animals have always made a major contribution to the welfare
> of human societies by providing food, shelter, fuel, fertilizer and other
> products and services. They are a renewable resource, and utilize another
> renewable resource, plants, to produce these products and services. In
> addition, the manure produced by the animals helps improve soil fertility
> and, thus, aids the plants. In some developing countries the manure cannot
> be utilized as a fertilizer but is dried as a source of fuel.
>
> "There are many who feel that because the world population is growing at a
> faster rate than is the food supply, we are becoming less and less able to
> afford animal foods because feeding plant products to animals is an
> inefficient use of potential human food. It is true that it is more
> efficient for humans to eat plant products directly rather than to allow
> animals to convert them to human food. At best, animals only produce one
> pound or less of human food for each three pounds of plants eaten. However,
> this inefficiency only applies to those plants and plant products that the
> human can utilize. The fact is that over two-thirds of the feed fed to
> animals consists of substances that are either undesirable or completely
> unsuited for human food. Thus, by their ability to convert inedible plant
> materials to human food, animals not only do not compete with the human
> rather they aid greatly in improving both the quantity and the quality of
> the diets of human societies. (2)
>
> "Furthermore, at the present time, there is more than enough food grown in
> the world to feed all people on the planet. The problem is widespread
> poverty making it impossible for the starving poor to afford it. In a
> comprehensive report, the Population Reference Bureau attributed the world
> hunger problem to poverty, not meat-eating (3). It also did not consider
> mass vegetarianism to be a solution for world hunger.
>
> "What would actually happen, however, if animal husbandry were abandoned in
> favor of mass agriculture, brought about by humanity turning towards
> vegetarianism?
>
> "If a large number of people switched to vegetarianism, the demand for meat
> in the United States and Europe would fall, the supply of grain would
> dramatically increase, but the buying power of poor [starving] people in
> Africa and Asia wouldn't change at all.
>
> "The result would be very predictable -- there would be a mass exodus from
> farming. Whereas today the total amount of grains produced could feed 10
> billion people, the total amount of grain grown in this post-meat world
> would likely fall back to about 7 or 8 billion. The trend of farmers selling
> their land to developers and others would accelerate quickly. (4)
>
> "In other words, there would be less food available for the world to eat.
> Furthermore, the monoculture of grains and legumes, which is what would
> happen if animal husbandry were abandoned and the world relied exclusively
> on plant foods for its food, would rapidly deplete the soil and require the
> heavy use of artificial fertilizers, one ton of which requires ten tons of
> crude oil to produce (5).
>
> "As far as the impact to our environment, a closer look reveals the great
> damage that exclusive and mass farming would do. British organic dairy
> farmer and researcher Mark Purdey wisely points out that if "veganic
> agricultural systems were to gain a foothold on the soil, then agrochemical
> use, soil erosion, cash cropping, prairie-scapes and ill health would
> escalate." (6)
>
> "Neanderthin author Ray Audette concurs with this view:
>
> "Since ancient times, the most destructive factor in the degradation of the
> environment has been monoculture agriculture. The production of wheat in
> ancient Sumeria transformed once-fertile plains into salt flats that remain
> sterile 5,000 years later. As well as depleting both the soil and water
> sources, monoculture agriculture also produces environmental damage by
> altering the delicate balance of natural ecosystems. World rice production
> in 1993, for instance, caused 155 million cases of malaria by providing
> breeding grounds for mosquitoes in the paddies. Human contact with ducks in
> the same rice paddies resulted in 500 million cases of influenza during the
> same year.(7) "

START A NEWSGROUP CALLED ALT.DIET. I DON'T CARE. Yep thats right all
that research and I still don't care. I like meat I like other stuff
too. I really enjoy eating salads sometimes. Oh and I enjoy basketball
and long walks. I enjoy wait a damn minute NOBODY CARES DO THEY!