[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/16/theres-no-such-thing-as-humane-meat-or-eggs-stop-kidding-yourself https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/16/theres-no-such-thing-as-humane-meat-or-eggs-stop-kidding-yourself USDA data on the number of animals per farm in the US suggests that over 99% of US farmed animals live on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, commonly known as “factory farms”. Globally, that figure is probably over 90%. So 75% of Americans think they consume humane meat, but a tiny fraction actually do. The majority of consumers seem tragically wrong about what they eat. Take cage-free eggs, for example. Just because the birds aren’t in cages doesn’t mean they’re healthy or happy. Cage-free birds have around the same total space per bird; they just live in a large shed with thousands (often tens of thousands) of other birds. In this stressful environment, birds frequently peck each other so much that they lose feathers, bleed, and even die from what is effectively cannibalism caused by the birds’ high-density confinement. The air quality on cage-free farms tends to be worse due to the chickens walking around and kicking up dust and feces, which also threatens food safety.
[FairfieldLife] Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
On 11/11/18 3:39 PM, Sal Sunshine salsunshineini...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: > > > > On Nov 11, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Bhairitu noozgur...@gmail.com > [FairfieldLife] wrote: > > > > The US had a cheese glut this summer which was good for consumers. The > > nearby supermarket was selling Tillamook at $3 a package (usually 8 oz) > > so I picked up a package of extra sharp which rang up for $5. I > > complained about the price because it was marked $3 on the shelf. They > > came back and had removed the $3 price but had to give that price to > > me. I explained that there was a cheese glut which I had read about a > > couple weeks earlier and I had bought the same package at another store > > for $3. They looked clueless > > Maybe that’s because you seem to be privy to info nobody else is. What > on earth is a “cheese glut” anyway? Was there a big sale on dairy cows > earlier on or something? > Mainstream news you seemed to have missed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/28/americas-cheese-stockpile-just-hit-an-all-time-high/ https://www.vox.com/2018/7/4/17515068/trump-trade-cheese-surplus-agriculture-farming More on dairy in general: https://civileats.com/2018/11/05/whats-behind-the-crippling-dairy-crisis-family-farmers-speak-out/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-17/america-is-drowning-in-milk-nobody-wants Try to keep up!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
> On Nov 11, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Bhairitu noozgur...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] > wrote: > > The US had a cheese glut this summer which was good for consumers. The > nearby supermarket was selling Tillamook at $3 a package (usually 8 oz) > so I picked up a package of extra sharp which rang up for $5. I > complained about the price because it was marked $3 on the shelf. They > came back and had removed the $3 price but had to give that price to > me. I explained that there was a cheese glut which I had read about a > couple weeks earlier and I had bought the same package at another store > for $3. They looked clueless Maybe that’s because you seem to be privy to info nobody else is. What on earth is a “cheese glut” anyway? Was there a big sale on dairy cows earlier on or something? > because these people never follow what is > happening in the commodities market. In fact they don't teach store > staffs much at all about how retail works Yup, that’s gotta be it. If everyone isn’t up on the latest cheese glut info...lol...it’s obviously because they’re ignorant and uninformed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
You would need a global dictator to make these things work. Instead encourage a reduction in consumption. People don't like to be told by the government how to eat or drink and they certainly don't like higher taxes. You also need the medical industry to embrace nutritional consultation which isn't going to happen because it would hurt pharmaceutical sales. Some people may need red meat to restore their health probably after too many years of being on an ill advised vegetarian diet. :-D On 11/11/18 4:15 AM, skymt...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: > > > https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/06/taxing-red-meat-would-save-many-lives-research-shows > > > Taxing red meat would save many lives and raise billions to pay for > healthcare, according to new research. It found the cost of processed > meat such as bacon and sausages would double if the harm they cause to > people’s health was taken into account. > > Governments already tax harmful products to reduce their consumption, > such as sugar, alcohol and tobacco. With growing evidence of the > health and environmental damage resulting from red meat, some experts > now believe a “sin tax” on beef, lamb and pork is inevitable in the > longer term. > > The World Health Organization declared processed red meat to be a > carcinogen in 2015, and unprocessed red meat such as steaks and chops > to be a probable carcinogen. However, people in rich nations eat more > than the recommended amount of red meat, which is also linked to heart > disease, strokes and diabetes. > > > The new research looked at the level of tax needed to reflect the > healthcare costs incurred when people eat red meat. [for UK] It found > that a 20% tax on unprocessed red meat and a 110% tax on the more > harmful processed products across rich nations, with lower taxes in > less wealthy nations, would cut annual deaths by 220,000 and raise > $170bn (£130bn). > > The resulting higher prices would also cut meat consumption by two > portions a week – currently people in rich nations each eat one > portion a day. This would lead to a $41bn saving in annual healthcare > costs, the research shows. > > “Nobody wants governments to tell people what they can and can’t eat,” > Springmann said. But the healthcare costs incurred by eating red meat > are often paid by all taxpayers, he said: “It is totally fine if you > want to have [red meat], but this personal consumption decision really > puts a strain on public funds. It is not about taking something away > from people, it is about being fair.” > > To cover the total healthcare costs, the tax rates would need to be > hiked up again to about double the optimal taxation rates. > > The researchers calculated red meat taxes for 149 different nations, > with the rate depending on how much red meat those citizens eat and > the costliness of their healthcare system. The US would have among the > highest tax rates, with a 163% levy on ham and sausages and a 34% levy > on steaks. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
The US had a cheese glut this summer which was good for consumers. The nearby supermarket was selling Tillamook at $3 a package (usually 8 oz) so I picked up a package of extra sharp which rang up for $5. I complained about the price because it was marked $3 on the shelf. They came back and had removed the $3 price but had to give that price to me. I explained that there was a cheese glut which I had read about a couple weeks earlier and I had bought the same package at another store for $3. They looked clueless because these people never follow what is happening in the commodities market. In fact they don't teach store staffs much at all about how retail works. On 11/10/18 12:41 PM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: > > > to reduce your impact on Earth.. > > > Reduction of Meat and Dairy consumption is going to have its own > supply-side reduction instituted by Nature. > > > The last few summers in Europe show this. As the climate goes it is > already too hot and dry to reliably grow forage for sustaining cattle > herds. Even here in Iowa hay production is spotty and off markedly > with the erratic weather extremes. The last few years in this part of > Iowa we can be at a third of normal hay production. > > > In Germany where the climate is more typically really well suited > towards forage and dairy they are burning up locally and having to > import hay to their dairy herds to sustain milk production. Feedlot or > confinement meat? No, as consumables meat and dairy are an incredible > luxury that Nature in the terms of rapid global climate change will > not allow for. It is upon us already. Enjoy it with relish while you > got it. Anyone by ounce of conscious principle would avoid meat. > Definitely fish is out now. > > > Reference, > > > https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/world/europe/rhine-drought-water-level.html > > > https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/04/world/europe/europe-heat-wave.html?module=inline > > > # > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/06/taxing-red-meat-would-save-many-lives-research-shows https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/06/taxing-red-meat-would-save-many-lives-research-shows Taxing red meat would save many lives and raise billions to pay for healthcare, according to new research. It found the cost of processed meat such as bacon and sausages would double if the harm they cause to people’s health was taken into account. Governments already tax harmful products to reduce their consumption, such as sugar, alcohol and tobacco. With growing evidence of the health and environmental damage resulting from red meat, some experts now believe a “sin tax” on beef, lamb and pork is inevitable in the longer term. The World Health Organization declared processed red meat to be a carcinogen in 2015, and unprocessed red meat such as steaks and chops to be a probable carcinogen. However, people in rich nations eat more than the recommended amount of red meat, which is also linked to heart disease, strokes and diabetes. The new research looked at the level of tax needed to reflect the healthcare costs incurred when people eat red meat. [for UK] It found that a 20% tax on unprocessed red meat and a 110% tax on the more harmful processed products across rich nations, with lower taxes in less wealthy nations, would cut annual deaths by 220,000 and raise $170bn (£130bn). The resulting higher prices would also cut meat consumption by two portions a week – currently people in rich nations each eat one portion a day. This would lead to a $41bn saving in annual healthcare costs, the research shows. “Nobody wants governments to tell people what they can and can’t eat,” Springmann said. But the healthcare costs incurred by eating red meat are often paid by all taxpayers, he said: “It is totally fine if you want to have [red meat], but this personal consumption decision really puts a strain on public funds. It is not about taking something away from people, it is about being fair.” To cover the total healthcare costs, the tax rates would need to be hiked up again to about double the optimal taxation rates. The researchers calculated red meat taxes for 149 different nations, with the rate depending on how much red meat those citizens eat and the costliness of their healthcare system. The US would have among the highest tax rates, with a 163% levy on ham and sausages and a 34% levy on steaks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
https://whttps://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/11/how-we-lost-our-love-milk-altww.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/11/how-we-lost-our-love-milk-alt https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/nov/11/how-we-lost-our-love-milk-alt a quarter of us now consider ourselves “meat reducers”. In October, a major study on our food system published in the journal Nature advised that prosperous countries such as Britain and the US should cut their milk consumption by 60% (and beef intake by 90%). In most commercial dairies, calves are taken away from their mothers soon after birth; organic farms are required to keep them together for a minimum of 24 hours. On the most intensive dairies, cows will be milked three times a day. In these industrial facilities many cows don’t survive to the age of five. In the UK, some estimates suggest that dairy consumption has fallen by 30% in the past two decades. While over-65s were found to drink milk 875 times a year, young people (aged five to 24) only did so on 275 occasions.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
From the second article that Doug posted. That's sad -- having hiked daily in high Alp hillside pastures after lunch on courses in Switzerland, and seeing the beautiful herds. In Switzerland, where the herds are led to the high pastures in summer to graze, the drought has stranded cows without water. Farmers have turned to the country’s helicopter association and the Swiss Air Force to transport tens of thousands of gallons of water every week to keep the herds alive. “The situation is very serious,” said Christian Garmann, a spokesman for the Swiss Helicopter Association. “For thousands of years, the cows could get water at small watering holes. Now they are dry in many places.” The last time the association undertook an aid mission was in the summer of 2003, but this year “the situation is more extreme” with some farmers considering slaughtering their herds, Mr. Garmann said. Reto Rüesch, the managing director of Heli-Linth, a member of the helicopter association, said his company was running 30 to 40 trips a day, transporting 250 gallons on each run
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/calcium-and-milk/calcium-full-story/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/calcium-and-milk/calcium-full-story/ A useful calcium article. Amngst other insights, higher levels of calcium potentially can cause problems. Additional evidence further supports the idea that American adults may not need as much calcium as is currently recommended. For example, in countries such as India, Japan, and Peru where average daily calcium intake is as low as 300 milligrams per day (less than a third of the U.S. recommendation for adults, ages 19 to 50), the incidence of bone fractures is quite low. Of course, these countries differ in other important bone-health factors as well—such as level of physical activity and amount of sunlight—which could account for their low fracture rates. Possible Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer High levels of galactose, a sugar released by the digestion of lactose in milk, have been studied as possibly damaging to the ovaries and leading to ovarian cancer. Although such associations have not been reported in all studies, there may be potential harm in consuming high amounts of lactose. A recent pooled analysis of 12 prospective cohort studies, which included more than 500,000 women, found that women with high intakes of lactose—equivalent to that found in 3 cups of milk per day—had a modestly higher risk of ovarian cancer, compared to women with the lowest lactose intakes. (15) The study did not find any association between overall milk or dairy product intake and ovarian cancer. Some researchers have hypothesized, however, that modern industrial milk production practices have changed milk’s hormone composition in ways that could increase the risk of ovarian and other hormone-related cancers. (16) More research is needed. Probable Increased Risk of Prostate Cancer A diet high in calcium has been implicated as a probable risk factor for prostate cancer. (17) In a Harvard study of male health professionals, men who drank two or more glasses of milk a day were almost twice as likely to develop advanced prostate cancer as those who didn’t drink milk at all. (18) The association appears to be with calcium itself, rather than with dairy products in general: A more recent analysis of the Harvard study participants found that men with the highest calcium intake—at least 2,000 milligrams a day—had nearly double the risk of developing fatal prostate cancer as those who had the lowest intake (less than 500 milligrams per day). (19) Clearly, although more research is needed, we cannot be confident that high milk or calcium intake is safe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
a follow-up on calcium daily requirements ... Given the below more real-world daily calcium requirement of around 500 mg of calcium cited in the Harvard Health article, this can be fairly easily met with a vegan diet. Good to keep in mind also that magnesium is also a very important mineral -- we require about 500 mg daily. Meeting your calcium requirements with dairy falls far short of providing sufficient magnesium. However, meeting calcium requirements on vegan diet will generally meet or exceed minimum magnesium requirements. https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/how-much-calcium-do-you-really-need https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/how-much-calcium-do-you-really-need How much calcium per day is recommended? Like many women, you may have memorized the minimum daily calcium requirement—1,000 milligrams (mg) a day for women ages 50 and younger and 1,200 mg for women over 50—and followed it faithfully in an effort to preserve your bones. You'll probably be surprised to learn that many health authorities don't agree with that recommendation. Dr. Walter Willett, chair of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, thinks you're likely to do just as well on half as much calcium. "Essentially, I think that adults do not need 1,200 mg of calcium a day. The World Health Organization's recommendation of 500 mg is probably about right. The United Kingdom sets the goal at 700 mg, which is fine, too. It allows for a little leeway," he says. One thing the studies have taught us is that both calcium and vitamin D are essential in building bone. The question is how much of each. Dr. Willett recommends going lower on calcium and higher on vitamin D than the guidelines suggest—500 to 700 mg a day of calcium and 800 to 1,000 IU of vitamin D. At that rate, you can probably get all or most of your calcium from food, especially if you have a serving or two of dairy products daily. If you can't tolerate dairy, you should still be able to get 300 mg a day in your diet and can take a low-dose calcium supplement to make up the rest. By keeping your supplement consumption to 500 mg or less a day, you should avoid the possible risk of heart disease and kidney stones suggested by the studies.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
What you need is HIGHLY INDIVIDUAL. That is even the cornerstone ayurveda. One form of nutritional typing will diagnose looking at the individual's electrolyte balance. Some will need a different calcium to magnesium balance and maybe a different sodium to potassium balance. It reflects the metabolic rate which is also HOW ayurveda and Chinese medicine works.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
Depends upon the calcium. Calcium carbonate or citrate? Citrate might not do that. My background in metabolic typing, where vitamin supplements are used, the parasympathetic type supplement uses calcium citrate. Parasympathetic types are often kapha.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
Like many here probably did back in the 1970s you'll learn the hard way. Diet is principally governed by genetics. That's why people from India can get away with a vegetarian diet but people from colder reasons cannot. It takes generations to adapt too. Climate change has more to do with the sun than anything else. But it's always good to reduce pollution.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
Yes, plant-based diet is good for the earth, climate change, ecosystems, bio-diversity, defense costs, national security, lifestyle opportunities, national/world medical costs, budget deficits and national debt, livelihoods, etc. However, it is not a question of doing good for the earth by enduring an individual sacrifice of health. There is a fairly strong consensus in health and diet research that a more / mostly plant-based diet is far healthier than a carnivore/dairy diet. I am not really dabbling/ experimenting. I have been a vegetarian since I was 18. No anemia. My study of research/evidence-based nutrition, as a layman, throughout my life, continues to point towards the value of plant-based diets.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single bi gg est way’ to reduce your impact on Earth
How old are you? Younger people can experiment with these things but as you get older extreme diets can have a disastrous effect. Even younger folks will have a hard time with extreme diets done too long. I have been working with dietetic principles since the 1970s. You have to eat what is right for you not for the world.
