I heard something to do with Nitrogen and …cow farts(?) I am really unsure of this and would like to learn more.

Answer -

4 Parts

  • Ethical reason for consuming animals
  • Methane produced by cows are a harmful greenhouse gas which is contributing to our current climate crisis
  • Health Reasons - there is convincing evidence that processed meats cause cancer
  • it takes a lot more calories of plant food to produce the calories we would consume from the meat.

Details about the answers are in the comments

  • fkn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I read your other post using poor and nemeck and even that article shows it.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      if you can cite where in that article it gives credit to cattle for conserving water that would be wasted, I would eat my hat.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        For each study, we recorded the inventory of outputs and inputs (including fertilizer quantity and type, irrigation use, soil, and climatic conditions).

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              no. I just want to see how much water they say cows consumed from cotton and the total amount of water they say was used to grow the cotton. and then I want you to ask yourself if it’s reasonable to attribute ANY of that water to cows (it isn’t)

              • fkn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Cam you link specifically what you mean? I don’t see any attribution of cotton water to cattle in the 2018 Poor, Nemeck.

                • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  i’m having problems right now even pulling up the full article, but, to my recollection, they didn’t actually gather any of this data themselves, so you should be able to find some oblique reference to water used somewhere in the body of the paper, and then follow the citation to the actual study that did gather the data.

              • matlag@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                A non-peered review article from a totally unbiased source.

                Coming up next, an article demonstrating the benefit of burning oil for the environment by Shell.

                  • matlag@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Today we burn tons of oil. Say tomorrow we have switched to all electric. Do you think we’ll keep extracting oil and that will create an environmental burden because of that oil sitting around?

                    That’s the same reasoning.

                    Today we grow megatons of corn,… for different things, including feeding livestocks.

                    Tomorrow, if we have less livestock, we’ll adapt the crops mix, just like rest of the world has been or is still doing fine without having mega-herds of cows.

                    We don’t have too many cows because we had too much crops. We increased the crops to match the herds!