http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathy-...t_b_40261.html
Kathy Freston.Author, Health and Wellness Expert


The report released today by the world's leading climate scientists
made no bones about it: global warming is happening in a big way and
it is very likely man-made. So, if we are indeed the bulk of the
problem, we ought to step up and start doing things differently. Now.

My last post ("Vegetarian Is the New Prius") got a lot of traction,
and I think it's because there is a realization that being "part of
the solution" can be a whole lot simpler -and cheaper - than going out
and buying a new car. We can make a huge difference in the environment
by eating a plant based diet instead of an animal based one. Factory
farming pollutes our air and water, reduces the rainforests, and goes
a long way to create global warming. And although the vast majority of
responses to the piece were positive, there were some
environmentalists for whom the idea of giving up those chicken nuggets
was impossible to swallow.

My favorite movie of last year was Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth (Al
Gore for the Nobel Peace Prize!), but I have to admit that when I
speak with environmentalists about the obvious waste and pollution
involved in the totally unnecessary activity of meat consumption, I
feel a lot like Mr. Gore trying to convince the U.S. Congress to take
the issue of global warming seriously during his first term in the
Congress. I thought I might discuss a few of the key concerns that
were posted to the blog and that my meat-eating friends offer in
defense of their continued meat consumption. So here we go:


Some were worried about thriving, physically, on a vegetarian diet.

Now this just does not make sense. Half of all Americans die of heart
disease or cancer and two-thirds of us are overweight. The American
Dietetic Association says that vegetarians have "lower rates of death
from ischemic heart disease; ... lower blood cholesterol levels, lower
blood pressure, and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and
prostate and colon cancer." Vegetarians, on average, are about
one-third as likely to be overweight as meat-eaters.


And I've just learned from the brilliant Dr. Andrew Weil that there is
something called arachidonic acid, or AA, in animal flesh which causes
inflammation. AA is a pro-inflammatory fatty acid. He explains that
"heart disease and Alzheimer's - among many other diseases - begin as
inflammatory processes. The same hormonal imbalance that increases
inflammation increases cell proliferation and the risk of malignant
transformation." They are finding out that inflammation is key in so
many of the diseases that plague us. So when you eat meat, you ingest
AA, which causes inflammation, which fires up the disease process. It
doesn't matter if the chicken is free range or the beef is grass-fed
because the fatty acid is natural and inherent in the meat.

As for having strength and energy on a vegetarian diet, some of the
world's top athletes are vegetarian. A few examples: Carl Lewis
(perhaps the greatest Olympian of all time), Robert Parish (one of the
"50 Greatest Players in NBA History"), Desmond Howard (Heisman Trophy
winner and Super Bowl MVP), Bill Pearl (professional bodybuilder and
four-time "Mr. Universe"), Jack La Lanne (Mr. Fitness himself) and
Chris Evert (tennis champion). Vegetarian athletes have the advantage
of getting all the plant protein, complex carbohydrates and fiber they
need without all the artery-clogging cholesterol and saturated animal
fats found in meat that would slow them down. In fact, Carl Lewis says
that "my best year of track competition was the first year I ate a
vegan diet."

One response pointed out that the rain forest is being cut down to
grow soy, not meat.

Actually, much of the rain forest is being chopped down for grazing,
but also yes, the rain forest is being chopped down to grow soy--but
not for human consumption. Americans and Europeans can't raise all the
feed domestically that is needed to sustain their meat addictions, so
agribusiness has started cutting down the rain forest. Ask Greenpeace
or any other environmental group and they'll tell you that the
overwhelming majority of soy (or corn or wheat, for that matter) is
used to feed animals in factory farms. In fact, Greenpeace recently
unveiled a massive banner over an Amazon soy field that read,
"KFC-Amazon Criminal," to accentuate the point that large chicken and
other meat companies like KFC are responsible for the destruction of
the Amazon. It takes many pounds of soy or other plant foods to
produce just 1 pound of animal flesh--so if you're worried about the
rain forests being chopped down for grazing or to grow soy, your best
move is to stop eating chickens, pigs, and other animals. If more
people went vegetarian, we would need far less land to feed people,
and we wouldn't have to destroy the few natural places that this world
has left.

Some wondered about humane, organic, or kosher meat.

Sadly, most of the meat, egg, and dairy companies that pretend to be
eco- or animal-friendly, with packages covered in pictures of pretty
red barnyards, are basically the same massive corporately owned
factory-farms but with a newly hired advertising consultant. In fact,
labels like "Swine Welfare" and "UEP Certified" are simply the
industry labels that attempt to hide the horrible abuse involved in
these products' production. And even "organic" farms are
industrializing in ways that shock the journalists who bother to
investigate. Sadly, "kosher" means nothing when it comes to how
animals are treated on farms, and the largest kosher slaughterhouse in
North America was caught horribly abusing animals--ripping the
tracheas out of live cows' throats and worse--and defending the abuse
as kosher.

All that said, it's undeniable that the rare meat-eater who limits
him- or herself to a bit of grass-fed cattle flesh on occasion is
making a much smaller environmental impact than the vast majority of
Americans. But when you consider that no reputable scientific or
medical body believes that eating animals is good for us, let alone
necessary, one has to wonder about environmentalists who insist on
consuming products that we know to be resource-intensive and polluting
(even if they're less resource intensive and polluting than some other
similar options or eaten in "moderation"). It'd be like driving an SUV
that gets 15 mpg rather than 10, or driving an SUV three days per week
instead of seven. Sure, it might be better for the environment, but
with so many more fuel-efficient ways to get from A to B, there's no
need to drive any SUV at all. Eating meat--any meat--is the same
thing: With so many healthy vegetarian options that are kinder and far
more eco-friendly than even the "best" meat products, there's just no
good justification for someone who claims to be an
environmentalist--or to oppose cruelty--for doing it.


Some worry about 'preachy' or 'judgmental' or 'extreme' vegetarians.

And some consider the very choice to be a vegetarian to be extreme.
Although I certainly don't like radical-in-your-face messages, the
truth is that sometimes it's the only thing that seems to wrench us
out of our slumber. I know it worked with me when I saw one of the
slaughterhouse videos--definitely not pleasant, but it got my
attention.


The very nature of progressive movements throughout history is to tell
others to stop doing something harmful or degrading (e.g., using
humans as slaves, sexually harassing women, forcing children to work
in sweatshops, harming the environment, etc). Yes, the abolitionists,
suffragists, feminists, and civil rights activists were called
extreme, and similarly, some vegetarians are called extreme. But maybe
it's just because vegetarianism is not yet a cultural norm. Old habits
- and appetites - die hard, and there is usually a lot of resistance
before things change. I'm a southern gal and I loved my chicken fried
steak like no other. I didn't want to give up the joys of Sunday BBQ
or chicken wings with my friends on a Friday night. I get it; I
understand. But still, if we are to continue evolving - physically,
emotionally, and spiritually -we really do have to look at how our
dinner choices affect not only the environment, but even more
importantly, the well-being (or intense suffering) of other creatures.
So yes, on the one hand, the move to eating a plant based diet may
look extreme because most people don't do it. But on the other hand,
we can still have our BBQ (soy dogs and veggie burgers) and feel good
about it.

I do feel strongly that vegetarians should not play into the self
righteous stereotypes, that we should not be shrill or judgmental, of
course, but that doesn't require silence; it simply requires patience
and decorum.

A few people asked about meat in the developing world, or meat for
Eskimos or Inuit.

If you are an Eskimo or you're living in sub-Saharan Africa and you're
reading this blog, I'm not going to begrudge you your pound of flesh;
it would be silly of me to do so. But if you're reading this in a
developed country where almost all animals are eating animal feed
rather than grazing, are factory-farmed rather than living with
families or hunted, and you have abundant vegetarian options all
around you, talk of people who have limited food options doesn't apply
to you.


Some people worried that it's hard to be a vegetarian.

Being vegetarian isn't exactly the supreme sacrifice?surfing around
the food pics on any vegetarian cooking site will show you that.
Vegetarian and vegan food is everywhere (even Burger King has a veggie
burger!). Most, if not all, major grocery stores carry soy milk, mock
meats ("chicken" nuggets, BBQ "ribs," burgers, soy "sausage," etc.),
vegan cheeses, and soy ice cream. If you can't find what you want at
the store, most will order it for you. Many restaurants have veggie
options a-plenty (especially Thai, Indian, Ethiopian, Mexican, and
other ethnic restaurants--which are my favorite anyway). Sure, some
vegetarians may prefer not to eat food that was cooked on the same
grill as meat, but I'm not concerned about that (it does not cause
more animals to suffer or more environmental harm). You can find great
vegetarian recipes at www.VegCooking.com.



Although not responses to my "New Prius" post, I'd also like to
address the top five most common things that I hear from meat-eaters
regarding their meat consumption:

Number five: 'Humans have always eaten animals--it's natural.'

First, our evolution in human morality is marked almost entirely by
our attempt to move beyond the "might makes right" law of the jungle.
It may indeed be "natural" for the powerful to dominate the weak--but
that doesn't mean we should support it.

Second, human bodies aren't meant to eat meat. It's always seemed
strange to me that we're the only species on Earth that has to cook
flesh in order to eat it without getting sick. Look at our bodies:
We're just not meant to eat flesh. Like all herbivores, almost all of
our teeth are flat and blunt (the mouths of carnivores and omnivores
are full of sharp incisors). Like all herbivores, our intestines are
looooong (carnivores and omnivores have short intestines so they can
get the rotting flesh they eat out quickly). We don't have sharp claws
to seize and hold down prey. The list goes on. We may have had a need
to eat meat thousands of years ago, in times of scarcity as
hunter-gatherers, but we don't need to now, and we'll be better off if
we don't. Dr William C. Roberts, M.D., editor of the American Journal
of Cardiology, says, "Although we think we are one, and we act as if
we are one, human beings are not natural carnivores. When we kill
animals to eat them, they end up killing us, because their flesh,
which contains cholesterol and saturated fat, was never intended for
human beings, who are natural herbivores." Check out this essay by Dr.
Milton Mills for more information on the issue of whether the human
physiology is designed for meat consumption.

Most critically, the people who say this generally use it to justify
buying the same old meat that comes from giant, wholly unnatural
factory farms where animals are crammed into filthy sheds or cages and
not allowed to do anything natural to them--at all, ever (breathe
fresh air, bask in the sun, raise their young, dustbathe, form social
orders, etc.). Chickens in the egg industry have half their beaks cut
off, piglets in the pork industry have their tails cut off, etc.
(please take 10 minutes to watch the video at www.Meat.org). This is
how 99 percent of chickens and turkeys, 95 percent of pigs and eggs,
and most cow flesh and dairy products end up on our plates.

Lastly, if you care so much about being "natural," then think for a
moment about the harm that you're doing to your natural environment by
eating meat--any meat. At the end of the day, for me, we don't need to
eat meat, we'll be better off without it, and it causes animals to
suffer.

Number four: 'Animals are not equal to humans, so we should not be so
concerned about them.'

I disagree with Princeton Professor Peter Singer on many issues, but
on this one I think he gets it precisely right. Writes Dr. Singer,
"[W]hen non-vegetarians say that 'human problems come first,' I cannot
help wondering what exactly it is that they are doing for human beings
that compels them to continue to support the wasteful, ruthless
exploitation of farm animals." Which is to say: Fine, don't spend any
time at all on animal issues, but please don't pay other people to
abuse animals, which is what you are doing when you buy chicken, pork,
or other animal products. And remember: A vegetarian diet is also the
best diet for the planet, so eat as though the planet depended on it,
since it just might.

Number three: 'There have been many brilliant meat-eaters, like
Picasso and Mozart, so they could not have been wrong.'

I highly doubt that anyone is going to suggest that vegetarians Steve
Jobs, Leonardo da Vinci, Pythagoras, Albert Einstein, Leo Tolstoy, or
Mohandas Gandhi were especially brilliant because they were
vegetarians, and I also don't think one can make the argument that
meat-eaters attained their great heights as a result of their diet.
Interestingly, studies show that vegetarians are smarter than
meat-eaters, but there is probably not causality there--it's probably
just that thoughtful people tend to question things more deeply, hence
the decision to become vegetarian. Here's a 2006 study from the
British Medical Journal about vegetarians being smarter than
meat-eaters.


Number two: 'Where do you draw the line? Should we protect insects?
What's the difference between killing plants and killing animals?
They're all alive.'

The theologian and Narnia inventor C.S. Lewis staunchly opposed
testing on animals on Christian grounds, and he pointed out to those
who asked this question that the question is baseless--they already
know and understand the differences between plants and animals. To
whit, every reader will recoil in horror if asked to imagine lighting
a cat on fire or beating a dog's head in with a baseball bat--because
we know that these things cause the animals pain. But none of us feels
similarly at the prospect of pulling weeds or mowing our lawn--because
we know that weeds and lawns have no capacity to feel pain. Chickens,
pigs, fish, and cattle all feel pain in the same way and to the same
degree as any dog or cat. Just watch their faces and their body
language in these undercover videos; listen to their animal versions
of screaming. I assure you, grass does not suffer like these poor
creatures do.

I'm not so sure about insects, though I try to give them the benefit
of the doubt whenever possible. Yes, when I walk down the street, I'm
sure I step on bugs. But does the fact that I can't stop all cruelty
mean that I shouldn't bother to stop a lot of it? Of course not.
That'd be like saying that if you drive a car, you shouldn't even
bother to recycle.

And the number one justification for eating meat is: 'Meat won't kill
me, and I like it.'

No question?this is the crux of it all, the only purely honest answer
if you ask me. Sure enough, unless you get really bad food poisoning
from your next piece of undercooked chicken or choke to death on a
piece of steak, meat won't kill you right away. But chances are pretty
good that eating meat could reduce your life span (and quality) in the
long run. I imagine the fact that we're not designed to eat meat (as I
discussed above) may explain the fact that the American Dietetic
Association (the overarching group of nutrition researchers, doctors,
etc.) says that vegetarians have lower rates of heart disease, cancer,
diabetes, and obesity than do meat-eaters. Some argue that for every
study, there's another that says the opposite, but that's simply not
so in this case--there isn't a single reputable scientific or medical
body that disagrees with the simple fact that vegetarians are a
fraction as likely to be overweight and much less likely to suffer
from heart disease and cancer. Really, even if I didn't give a hoot
about animal suffering or environmental degradation, I would still be
vegetarian because the diet is the best diet for my health. And as
noted, eating meat does support cruelty to animals and environmental
degradation, all for the sake of a palate preference (which, by the
way, can be largely satisfied by the luscious faux meat options out
there).

Concluding thoughts:

One thing about being a vegetarian that is often missed is how
empowering it is. Personally, I think that integrity of action
requires that among other things, we attempt to lead lives that are as
compassionate and conscious as possible. What this means to me,
personally, is that if there is something that I would not want to do
myself, I don't feel good paying someone else to do it on my behalf.
So I don't inflict suffering or kill animals myself; and I don't
support the market of killing by buying these poor animals chopped up
and shrink-wrapped in the grocery store either.

We are a nation of animal lovers, and we all cringe in horror when we
hear about cases like a dog being burned alive or tossed into freeway
traffic. But chickens and pigs and other animals also deserve our
compassion. They are all smart animals who feel pain and fear, yet
they are treated just horribly, and sadly, there are no laws to
protect them. Don't take my word for it, watch Alec Baldwin's "Meet
Your Meat" and see for yourself what goes on.

We oppose sweatshops and child labor, and we cringe at the thought of
children laboring in developing countries. But American
slaughterhouses are sweatshops. They employ people working illegally
who can't defend themselves out of fear of being deported. Conditions
in these places are so bad that the average annual turnover rate for
slaughter-line workers is out of sight. Check out the Web site of this
labor organization to learn about its fight against Smithfield Foods
(the world's largest pork and turkey producer--it owns Butterball).

We are environmentalists, and we cringe when see a bright yellow
Hummer in the grocery store parking lot. But as bad as the amount of
fuel that a Hummer uses or the amount of greenhouse gasses that it
emits is, if we're eating meat, we're making a conscious decision that
is even more wasteful and polluting. In addition to my "New Prius"
piece, check out this E magazine article by the magazine's editor,
"The Case Against Meat," or this Grist.com article, "How Poultry
Producers Are Ravaging the Rural South," as just a few examples.

Americans and Europeans eat meat because we want to, not because we
have to. And we do it at the expense of animals, people, and the
environment.

This may be inconvenient, but I am convinced that it's the truth.