sustainability of a nationwide meat and dairy based diet???

[UrbanSimplicity]

I just heard again that it takes 10 times the amount of grain to feed animals for meat consumption compared to the amount to sustain a vegetarian diet. (did i say that right?) anyhow, it always gets me thinking, does this way of eating make sense for a large population? (i hope so). I'm guessing perhaps there is something about raising cattle in a humane and natural way that makes this system doable in the long run?

And Sally Fallon's love of foie gras makes me a little uncomfortable. Anyone else?

btw - i *heart* TF!! despite my inquiries above!

[mamadelbosque]

Raising animals as we do today, is unsustainable. Feeding so much grain to cattle, chickens, pigs, etc is bad for them, bad for us and bad for our envirnoment. We need to switch over to grass/forage-based agriculture for our animals. Long term, that will probably necesitate a more diet based on more vegetables & fruits than it is today.

I'm 100% against foie grass, and 100% against veal. I refuse, absolutely refuse, to ever, ever buy or eat either. I don't care if I come to your house for dinner, and thats what your serving. I will. not. eat. it.

[UrbanSimplicity]

also, to answer my own question, i think it becomes more important to eat more of the animal than just the muscle cuts like is most often consumed in the mainstream. The whole animal needs to be honored and utilized.

[fresh_veggie]

Originally Posted by UrbanSimplicity

also, to answer my own question, i think it becomes more important to eat more of the animal than just the muscle cuts like is most often consumed in the mainstream. The whole animal needs to be honored and utilized.

I agree, but that won't solve the problem. Most of the cow IS ground up and sold to be made into patties that people eat at fast food joints, and rest of the animal is made into dog/cat food.

We just have too many people to be able to support with a TF kind of diet (I'm veggie, but I love lots of things about TF, mostly the fermented foods). The amount of land needed to support a population that exists mostly on animal foods is a lot! That's not to say it's not healthy, but it's not sustainable per se if everyone did it. Back in the day when our dietary habits were forming, we were able to all eat healthily in the TF way, there were a lot less people on the planet to support.

At least, that's just my take. I do study nutrition and wellness at university, but I don't know everything .

[fresh_veggie]

Oh, and I'm against foe gras and veal as well. A lot of my veggieness has to do with ethical concerns with how the vast majority of animals are treated. Happy cows? Fine in my book, but they are few and far between.

[Magelet]

I think that it is definitely possible to have a widespread use of TF eating, however, I don't think it is possible to have widespread use of primal eating, or of very meat heavy TF eating. I think that for widespread world use, there would be a LOT more eggs and alternative milks consumed (such as goat milk, goats take a lot less land than cows), and a lot lot lot less meat consumed. Also more veggies and grains and stuff. Which is definitely one flavor of traditional diets.

[Smokering]

Cows shouldn't eat grain. So on that math, yes, meat-eating is inefficient. But it's the wrong math.

[Zenzero]

[jamie79]

If you look at Nora Gedgaudas website: primal body primal mind, you will see that her take on primal (and my own) is that you don't need much protein. I think she says about 50 g per day max. However, she advocates lots of fat in the form of grass fed dairy, cream, butter, etc, coconut oil, avocadoes and the like.

I think following this sort of plan is *more* sustainable. Also, like was said above, using the whole animal.

So, with eating less meat (protein), but more fat, it seems to be more doable.

[alireb]

Originally Posted by Smokering

Cows shouldn't eat grain. So on that math, yes, meat-eating is inefficient. But it's the wrong math.

Ditto. Also, you might want to read The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Kieth since she talks about the fact that a vegetarian diet is not necessarily best for the environment b/c of the heavy use of agriculture and the destruction these monocrops have on our land and soil. She's a former vegan for 20 years.

[seashells]

I think it was one of Raj Patel's book that explained how we have underutilized grazing lands - specifically steep areas that we don't build on anyway.

But even with that, I would say that we'd have to go back to a local/community based agriculture. We shouldn't be eating animals that have to be raised outside our area. I guess big cities are a problem but we can expand "local" a bit - New Jersey has a lot of agricultural potential for NYC. And as long as we're being theoretical, I guess I agree that NYC is probably too big to sustain in that way, it depends on factory farming from far away.

I was vegetarian for 10 years because I am anti-CAFO but didn't know of any alternatives. I always believed that humans are meant to eat some meat, we have digestive systems that are longer than for pure carnivores but not equipped as pure herbivores. I don't, however, believe that most of us need meat 3 meals a day or anything (though I do think maybe some individuals might thrive on that). Also, frequency aside, I don't think most of us need to eat huge slabs of meat at every meal. I consider meat a side dish, not a main dish, and I think many of us could thrive doing it that way.

I also agree that better use of the animal would help, though yes, we do use it all for pet food and fertilizer and (ugh) chicken and cow feed. There is, however, a lot of waste due to poor farming practices where a percentage of livestock aren't even going to survive because it's so awful. (Obviously a percentage won't survive in the most loving of small farms either, but I'm talking about unnecessary losses due to poor conditions - like chickens cannibalizing because they don't have their natural food, bugs).

[BedHead]

I do not know a whole lot about it, but I was reading about sustainable farming practices and it explained how raising animals together (cattle and chickens it was talking about iirc) on pasture is sustainable because they naturally fertilize the ground with their droppings and live symbiotically with the land. There's little intervention required in the way of fertilizer and additional food for the animals. I'm sure someone else knows more about it and could explain it better.

[Teenytoona]

Oh. My. Gosh. I just looked up Foie Gras. I cannot believe that. How horrible.

I agree with Maglet, I think Primal eating may not be as sustainable, but then I think about ALL that land that's used to make ALL that corn and wheat, and think maybe it could be. Just thinking "out loud". I think especially if more people gardened intensively their veggies and looked for pastured meat sources, there'd be better sustainability.

[JamieCatheryn]

Grass fed cattle and sheep are totally sustainable, they eat what we can't and turn it into meat, dairy, and manure. The whole corn fed cattle thing just happened because of sudden surpluses when the artificial fertilizers came out post WWII.

[JMJ]

Of course, if everyone is eating grain, including all the animals, you can feed a lot more people if they just eat the grain than you can if you feed the grain to the animals and then have the people eat them. This fact is one that has been used to convince many, many people that they could reduce their carbon footprint by a factor of 10 by eating a vegetarian or near vegetarian diet. This is not the model that any TFer I know has for producing meat.

Some meat producers such as polyface farms are using natural symbiotic relationships between animals in order to really push the limits as to how much meat can be raised in a small amount of space. Some meat producers are utilizing land that is not good for farming or building and in climates with too short growing seasons.

Really, to maximize the amount of food that can be produced so that our planet can sustain as many lives as possible, we need to look at all our options and to have different diets in different areas based on what is available and in season locally. I think that it's also not just about feeding everyone, but about nourishing them well. It's worth it to me to allow for reasonable transportation of food in order to allow everyone to get the nutrients they need.

I think that more research needs to be done on how to produce food and move it around and choose foods in different places in order to maximize food production in order to allow more and more people to be nourished on this planet (and maybe others!). I don't think that the answer is for everyone in the world to eat an all or mostly meat diet, but trying to get it done by eliminating meat from the diet is not only unhealthy. It's inefficient!

[snowbunny]

Cows shouldn't eat grain. So on that math, yes, meat-eating is inefficient. But it's the wrong math.

Exactly.

On foie gras and veal, as with anything, it's essential to know your supplier. Geese instinctively gorge themselves on food in autumn as preparation for winter, that's not a force-fed operation. Indeed, many sustainable traditional producers of foie gras give geese plenty of access to the outdoors, as they should, and offer them nuts and figs and other treats and the geese overeat naturally as part of their instinctive rhythm.

Similarly, with veal it's a matter of knowing your farmer. Veal calves are traditionally slaughtered at about the same age as lambs and are actually older than most chickens, turkeys and pigs are when they're harvested. Moreover, if you're purchasing from a grass-fed operation, the veal calves have been given free access to pasture and have been raised on milk and grass. Their meat will be a rosy color, too.

You simply cannot compare modern techniques of force-feeding geese for foie gras, crating calves for veal, and feeding beef cattle on grain to traditional methods for producing these foods naturally.

[Koalamom]

Originally Posted by snowbunny

Exactly.

On foie gras and veal, as with anything, it's essential to know your supplier. Geese instinctively gorge themselves on food in autumn as preparation for winter, that's not a force-fed operation. Indeed, many sustainable traditional producers of foie gras give geese plenty of access to the outdoors, as they should, and offer them nuts and figs and other treats and the geese overeat naturally as part of their instinctive rhythm.

Similarly, with veal it's a matter of knowing your farmer. Veal calves are traditionally slaughtered at about the same age as lambs and are actually older than most chickens, turkeys and pigs are when they're harvested. Moreover, if you're purchasing from a grass-fed operation, the veal calves have been given free access to pasture and have been raised on milk and grass. Their meat will be a rosy color, too.

You simply cannot compare modern techniques of force-feeding geese for foie gras, crating calves for veal, and feeding beef cattle on grain to traditional methods for producing these foods naturally.

Thank you Snowbunny. Many of my local farmers raise veal humanely and on their mothers milk and lots of pasture. They just end up getting slaughtered because the farmers don't want to keep a ton of bulls when they have a dairy operation, but they do the best they can.

[mamadelbosque]

Maybe 'sustainable/humane' foie grass/veal exist. I don't know. What I *do* know is that you can *NOT* buy it in a store, and you can *NOT* order it at a restaurant without supporting the force feeding of geese, and the crating of calves, both of which are cruel, inhumane and just plain wrong. So saying 'oh, but some foie grass/veal is ok' is a bit disingeneous. Maybe it exists. But not as it is currently thought of by 99% of the population of the world. Therefor to recommend it be eaten on any sort of regular basis, is simply wrong.

[cristeen]

Originally Posted by mamadelbosque

Maybe 'sustainable/humane' foie grass/veal exist. I don't know. What I *do* know is that you can *NOT* buy it in a store, and you can *NOT* order it at a restaurant without supporting the force feeding of geese, and the crating of calves, both of which are cruel, inhumane and just plain wrong. So saying 'oh, but some foie grass/veal is ok' is a bit disingeneous. Maybe it exists. But not as it is currently thought of by 99% of the population of the world. Therefor to recommend it be eaten on any sort of regular basis, is simply wrong.

You can actually buy it in a store - you just have to choose the right store. And nobody was saying to eat it on a "regular basis", nor was anyone advocating ordering it in a restaurant. I think as TFers, we are all aware that very few restaurants exist that source their food as carefully as we do. But, I can get naturally raised veal "vitellone" from the same place I get my beef, pork, lamb, chicken and buffalo. They are fed mama's milk and grass before being slaughtered young. Like a pp mentioned - most farms don't care to keep extra bulls around, dairy farm or meat farm, so they're slaughtered young.

As for foie gras - if I could find a source for humanely raised goose, I would have no problem eating the liver, too. In fact, it would be wasteful not to.

As for the question of sustainability - pp have pretty much covered it. As meat production currently stands (CAFO) - no, it's not sustainable. But, traditionally raised meat, raised on a farm in symbiosis with the rest of the farming operation, that is sustainable. It is also a much better use of that land than monocropping, or allowing it to lay fallow like happens so often. Animals can also be raised in many regions that are unsuitable for farming, but part of making any change like that would require some serious changes in the expectations of the public. Expectations on everything from the appearance of beef, the cost of meat, to the unwillingness to try more "unusual" meats like goat or mutton (both of which require less land and can survive on less choice foods). And considering how unwilling the US public is to accept something as natural as BF, I don't really see any of that happening any time soon.

[fresh_veggie]

Originally Posted by JMJ

Of course, if everyone is eating grain, including all the animals, you can feed a lot more people if they just eat the grain than you can if you feed the grain to the animals and then have the people eat them. This fact is one that has been used to convince many, many people that they could reduce their carbon footprint by a factor of 10 by eating a vegetarian or near vegetarian diet. This is not the model that any TFer I know has for producing meat.

..

I think that more research needs to be done on how to produce food and move it around and choose foods in different places in order to maximize food production in order to allow more and more people to be nourished on this planet (and maybe others!). I don't think that the answer is for everyone in the world to eat an all or mostly meat diet, but trying to get it done by eliminating meat from the diet is not only unhealthy. It's inefficient!

This! While it's easy for me to thrive on fruits and vegetables (I don't eat much grain) and dairy and eggs (due to living in a first-world country with a large variety at the store down the street), it would be really hard for most people in the world to do this and get all the nutrients they need. An all meat diet would be terribly unhealthy, but for some people it is impossible to eliminate it health-wise.