Because not everyone agrees that it’s terrible for Earth. And even some of those that do may not consider it so terrible for Earth that it’s not worth the tastiness.
You’re wasting electricity running a computer right now, when we know that electricity generation is terrible for Earth. Why are you doing that?
I literally just called the uninformed position of “bad for the earth” out a little bit, and even have an anecdote of my positive personal experience eating meat. I get the sentiment for those who do eat meat, and get bullied just because they want to be healthy (while those who eat plants tend to have a lot of health issues, and can be overwight or obese by refined sugars, gluten, soy, seed oils and/or cow’s milk that’s GMO’d [a correlation some don’t seem to get]).
Glad to see someone’s on a similar page about it, as that’s just some sort of silly thing to me.
Why do people eat food they know isn’t good for their health? Why do people continue to buy products from companies that have proven to only sell bad products or engage in scumbag practices?
They all have the same answer.
It turns out in 1961 the American heart Association took bribery money from procter and gamble, who owned and sold “healthier Crisco” cooking oils that weren’t high in saturated fat, like beef and other cooking oils were.
The AHA then claimed and pushed that saturated fats caused heart disease.
Problem is, something like 88% of every study done in the past 60 years has found little to no link between heart disease and saturated fats.
So beef, according to most studies, isn’t bad for you. The AHA was just crooked and on the take, being paid off to sell Crisco.
Now it is calorie dense and people tend to eat too much of it, but that seems to be a lot of things. Don’t eat too much or you get fat. But apparently, you don’t have to worry about saturated fats being bad for you.
someone else online summarized the genetics part as the following:
Mandelian randomisation studies show that LDL-c is causative in atherogenic plaques 1 and metabolic ward RCTs show that SFA intakes increase LDL-c, while the decrease in SFAs lead to lower total and LDL-c 2.
But yes, almost all nutrition science is a bit inconclusive because of genetic variation.
Forgive me, because I’m struggling to understand the linked information, but as someone with atherosclerosis this is an issue close to my heart (ha!).
I just want to make sure I understand you.
Your link to the european heart journal says that the causal link between LDL and ASCVD is “unequivocal”.
I think the WHO study says (amongst a lot of other complicated stuff) that replacing SFAs with PUFAs and MUFAs is more favourable than replacing SFAs with complex carbohydrates? The strong implication being (although I couldn’t see this exactly) that higher SFA intake contributes to heart disease.
I always keep in mind the first doctor to advocate washing hands after handling corpses was laughed out of medicine and died alone in an asylum ironically enough from sepsis.
To that point, the vast majority of research on nutrition is done on the presumption carbohydrates should be the foundation of our diet. Even “low” carb diet studies with have 30% of the calories coming from simple carbs. Oddly enough, the human body works much differently and much better when you don’t give it -any- sugar: https://youtu.be/cST99piL71E
I can expand, but briefly, sugar acts like a sandblaster through your heart and shreds the endothelium (the finger-things that move things in and out of the bloodstream). LDL is a repair van that drives around with cholesterol and saturated fat to repair the plaques. (HDL brings empty LDL back to the liver) The entire logic of blaming cholesterol for heart disease is like blaming bandaids for stab wounds. Doctors say eat less fat and more “healthy whole grains” (carbs) and the liver makes more cholesterol. Doctor sees cholesterol is still high because the body needs it and prescribes statins which impair production. This leads to nerve pain because it’s what literally every nerve in the body is insulated with.
The problems with cholesterol stem from it sitting in the bloodstream and glycating due to prolonged sugar exposure. Sugar staying in the bloodstream is basically ketoacidosis, so clearing sugar is a priority that results in LDL gumming up and going bad, essentially.
I can expand on this, but basically the human body needs predominantly fat with some protein and actually zero carbs.
And not a source to be found
You seriously comment on a like 2 year old posting to bitch about citations in a comment thread?
I gave you all the information you’d need to find sources. Go do it yourself, fuckhead.
Hahahaha speaking of bitching
Why do people drive when they know it’s bad for the planet
Because I live in America and there’s pretty much no public transportation.
Trust me, if I had a train, I’d fucking use that sucker. Travel into town for my weekly errands AND I don’t have to deal with people not using cruise control on a highway? SIGN ME THE FUCK. UP.
Removed by mod
Because they don’t have the money and the requisite professions to leave.
Some of us work multiple part time jobs to barely make it.
I’d probably stay in the basement if I didn’t need to pay my landed lord their monthly tribute.
buy some cheap sliver of land and park a bus on it. save up and find a better sliver of land and plan from there.
Is it capitalism?
Because it’s a damn good source of creatine and protein. And it tastes good.
Where I live the beef is local and cheap. I’m not able to obtain enough protein without meat, as confirmed by a doctor and a nutritionist when I tried to go vegetarian. With food costs so high it’s cheaper to buy cow than anything else, but when I have the money I opt for fish or turkey. I looked into hunting but it’s prohibitively expensive for me with permits, tags, guns, licenses, days off and transportation. I tried fishing for myself as well, but whenever I get time to do it, there are warnings about eating fish in the area. When there aren’t I never catch anything big enough to legally be allowed to keep. I’d like to get chickens if/when local government ever lifts the bylaws preventing it.
What a loaded question.
Outside of the fact that a single cows life provides about 900 meals for humans, and the scraps left over make boots that last for a decade and also feed our cats and dogs. Plus, it’s delicious.
Yeah so, the amount of meals is correct. But that’s about it. I mean, I can’t say about the taste, to each their own, but one kg of cow meat needs two dozen kg of grain.
That’s about as inefficient as it gets.
As for the leather, the industry doesn’t like products that last a decade, so it isn’t actually using the leather in such a way. Industrial leather boots last a year tops.
Finally, pet food is made out of discarded cuts of meat, the uglies, etc. But also lots of cereals, and vegetables.
So we could really afford eating less meat. It isn’t good for anything. Not for us, not for the other species (certainly not for the cows, that get often half assed butchered in a hasty way because of quotas and profit), and absolutely not for the ecosystem.
But I guess the taste is all that matters.
Cows are not all fed on grain. A lot of cows are ranched on land that would not be suitable for growing grain crops.
Or even land that is suitable for growing grain, but they’re kept being fed almost entirely on grass, for better quality, better health (and less cow farts, lol), rather than cost cutting nasty to bulk them up.
Well, if we’re talking pure food-production efficiency, then if the land is capable of growing grain then it’s probably better to grow grain there and feed the grain directly to humans.
But upvote anyway for responding to a year-and-a-half-old thread, this is the oldest necro response I’ve received yet on the Fediverse. :)
Well, if we’re talking pure food-production efficiency, then if the land is capable of growing grain then it’s probably better to grow grain there and feed the grain directly to humans.
Well in that case perhaps we should do just algae and worms.
Or maybe we should consider more than “pure food-production efficiency” in such a crude manner.
Perhaps we should consider nutrition and health (of those eating the food, and the environment), more than just crude bulk quantity.
Grain based diet would ruin our immune systems, and the health of the soil, without animal fertilizer.
Grain based diet would ruin our immune systems, and the health of the soil, without animal fertilizer.
And we haven’t even started on the effects Glyphosate yet!
Whatever their food is, 1kg of beef requires 24kg of grain’s worth of energy. This is something they teach in high-school biology now. The higher the food chain, the more energy is lost. Stopping such production would be pretty beneficial to the environment, but whether we should is a complicated question.
But as I pointed out, many cattle are ranched on land that cannot grow grain. They can’t grow the sorts of crops that humans eat, only the sorts of crops that cattle eat. If cattle weren’t being ranched on those lands they wouldn’t be producing edible grain instead, or any other food that humans could eat. So the inefficiency is moot when it comes to the amount of nutrition produced, removing the cattle from that land would simply reduce the total amount of food we have available.
Sure, if you remove the cattle then wild animals could come in to replace them, but we should make sure that’s not going to result in starvation and poverty if we do that. Many areas of the world have subsistence ranching by the locals.
Interesting. However, a search says that feeding all the grass (or whatever) to cattle takes that food away from existing ecosystems in dry areas and potentially allow exotic weeds to take over land. So we probably don’t want this to expand to the point where we intrude on dry ecosystems.
It’s just a matter of land management. Many of those grassland areas used to have other large grazing animals on them, so as long as the cattle herds aren’t bigger than those old herds it should be sustainable.
Imagine how many people you could feed if we would just eat what we fed the animals!
We can’t live on hay and corn. Cows need several stomachs to do it.
Also, getting enough protein and creatine and other vitamins as a vegan is a hell of a lot of work and doesn’t taste as good.
Humans are animals, and the type of animals we are is omnivores. Not herbivores.
Humans are animals, and the type of animals we are is omnivores. Not herbivores.
Yup. Mostly better suited more leaning to the carnivore and fruitarian side of omnivore.
Man cannot live on grass.
Also, getting enough protein and creatine and other vitamins as a vegan is a hell of a lot of work and doesn’t taste as good.
I tried hard, for a decade, and never managed to fully do it, even with a lot of hemp kernels (1-4 cups) every day.
Health bouncing back since going keto-carn. Mostly beef. (Grass fed).
So simple, so easily healthy.
Contrast to the complex chemistry juggling jigsaw of trying to have a vegan diet.
Maybe blood type matters. Maybe other blood types than mine have an easier time of vegan (or at least vegetarian, or just pescetarian). Or other genetic, evolutionary, environmental factors.
You start.
Let me know how a diet of grass works out for you, your digestive system, your immune system, and overall health.
Well I’ve been vegan for a long time and am healthier than many animal abusers, so it’s going quite well for me :)
I don’t believe you know enough animal abusers to make such a claim
Of course I can, everyone around me is eating animals ;)
that’s not abuse
Right, the systematic torture of millions of animals is absolutely not animal abuse.
Can you finish this documentary: https://watchdominion.org/ (YouTube)
Or will you keep your eyes closed?
Simple. I like beef, so I eat beef.
It tastes good and I’m a carnivore.
Carnivore is fantastic for those who need to heal from health issues. It’s expensive if you don’t know what you’re doing, but it’s worth it once you study it.
Helping heal me. Yup.
Expensive?
Turns out cheaper in my experience. Not buying all the rest of that low nutrient cruft.
If you consider nutrient bio-availability, eating meat is order of magnitudes cheaper for the nutrition we’re getting. It’s a no-brainer if only people would give it a go.
Humans make methane too, btw, if we eat vegetables. Much, much less on carnivore in my personal experience, and I’ve not found any studies on environmental impact that even attempt to factor this in.
I’ve been attempting to fix that as well. The biggest contributor, I think, is linoleic acid in seed oils. Once you get through that hurdle, everything else should fit into place (cutting the soy, gluten and cow’s milk if autistic, refined sugars, and of course, seed oils).
Indeed, good shortlist.
I’d like to test reintroducing cow’s milk, as not pasteurized, raw. No source here though, afaik. Tried Jersey cow’s milk once, and it was fine, tried it a second time, and it was a hard fail. Goat and sheep, meh.
Your mention of “if autistic”, has me wonder about my fairly large ghee consumption.
Actually autistic, btw.
I happened to be legitimately autistic myself (diagnosed as such). Cow’s milk and gluten will not treat someone with autism very well, gluten due to leaky gut, and cow’s milk due to how it’s structured. Goat’s milk and sheep’s milk will do very well for those with autism (I can attest to that, as I consume goat’s milk in a butter from Meyenberg I use a lot).
As for ghee, that’s also okay, as it’s just the casein (both A1 and A2, whereas the A1 is your “lactose intolerance”) stripped out. Lactose too, though, again, that’s A1 casein.
omnivore, but i agree
1 the amount of beef I eat is not a major contributer to the problem. No matter how hard I try. The actual major contributors what to distract people by telling them that they can make the difference. They can’t. 2 I don’t like plants… 3 the way the grow plants for food is also terrible for earth
Plants actually cause a lot of health problems. For example…
- Wheat and other forms of gluten happened to strip Vitamin B3, causing schizophrenia.
- Seed oils mess up your brain in ways I can’t even imagine.
- Cow’s milk is unnecessary due to the way it’s pasteurized, as unpasteurized, raw milk (goat’s milk is really fantastic for my needs) is actually good for you (which is why it’s banned in some countries).
- Soy is good at kickstarting the transgendering process, as it alters the estrogen-testosterone balance (for males, it ups estrogen, where testosterone is upped for females who eat soy a lot)
- Refined sugars actually cause a lot of issues, like diabetes (it dries up the liver), cancer (refined sugars are an excellent food source for parasites and polyps), obesity (sugar gets turned into visceral fat, and causes one to gain that), and a myriad of other issues.
Do we see why I tend to eat beef a lot, and avoid these feed ingredients whenever I eat certain plants?
You started out decent, then went off the deepend. You are connecting plants to refined sugars in the end. An apple (from a plant) has no refined sugar. No plants do. And the milk thing sounds like a conspiracy theory. They ban raw milk because if it isn’t handled correctly, it can make you sick. While this is a bit of an over reach, in most places it started long before thier was an industry to protect.
What you did was take my comment slightly out of context. Fruit doesn’t have refined sugars, though they have fructose (which is a sugar that’s unrefined). If someone eats fruit, and they’re not of the body type to do that, health problems could arise from it. What I was doing was paraphrasing from studies I’ve read on each of the things here that I’ve gone ahead and researched myself.
As for the milk thing, why do you think an Amish farmer was being railroaded for selling raw milk? That’s because raw milk, when handled properly, is fantastic for the body without the need for it to be pasteurized. That’s what he was doing, and daddy government didn’t like that one bit, so they wanted to pull a ritual on him just to ensure they get the message of “raw milk bad”. The goat’s milk cheese I eat comes from raw goat milk, and I do fine with it, in my experience. Your mileage may vary.
The major contributors only sell what people buy. They won’t stop so long as there’s money to be made. And most plants grown for food go to feed animals.
You don’t like plants because you’re a big baby.
So yeah, your arguments suck.
This rage bait question could be reworded as…
Why do people consume <anything> when we know it’s bad for the earth.
That’s because, if done right and from the right source, certain meats are actually good for the human body.
Anybody who thinks that heart disease comes from eating meat does not understand that, despite the amount of research on it, meat cannot be considered to be bad for anyone’s health. Those that do have some research on it are going based upon flukes, fraud and lies, likely spread by witches and warlocks. I personally eat organic meat myself, and I have no health issues because of what I eat.
As they say… “you are what you eat”. Also, I eat meat so vegans and vegetarians can have an easier time not eating meat. In a way, I’m helping them in some sense (as far as I’m aware, but I could be wrong on that).
Eating beef (or any meat for that matter) isn’t harmful but “excessive consumption” of “industrially produced meat” is. And you shouldn’t cut out meat from your diet — our bodies need those nutrients.
Why do vegans always think they have the moral high ground?
Why does “whatever the fuck you are” have an inferiority complex?
Why does, “what ever the fuck is this comment” make no sense?
It’s nutritious. Instead of carefully observing some diet you can eat some beef and buckwheat or cabbage or beans, and you’re good.
That said, I eat meat so rarely that my relatives worry, mainly because it takes some time to cook if you boil it, and I’m lazy and unorganized, and frying it has the potential of, eh, leaving the kitchen for 5 minutes which turn out to be half an hour and returning for the smell.
Other than that people can’t care about every problem at once.
I only eat beef on special occasions a handful of times per year and, if I’m buying, make sure it is as local as possible. Bonus points if it’s from a farm that has land that’s otherwise crap for vegetable/staple farming (which is a lot here in mountainous Japan)
Because:
- Ruminants like cows repair our depleating topsoil via regenerative farming (our current approach of using petroleum-based fertilisers is not sustainable)
- A single cow’s life can feed a human for 1 to 2 years, compared to the many incidentally killed animals (insects, rodents, frogs, birds, etc.) during the growing and harvesting of crops, plus the destruction of entire ecosystems to create the mono-crop farms in the first place
- Humans need to eat lots of fat to be physically and mentally healthy, and beef provides lots of fat (the low-fat high-carbohydrate diets recommended by various agencies — starting with the US’s department of agriculture in the late '70s via the food pyramid — are making us sick, with once-rare diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, depression, and dementia now commonplace)
This is ignoring the fact that raising a cow for consumption requires ~10 times the amount of crops per calorie compared to just eating the crops directly. Also, I don’t think I’ve heard a single health expert recommend eating more beef - the universal understanding is that red meat consumption is generally a net negative in terms of overall health.
