January 30, 2008

 

Top US newspaper slams meat production

 

 

A week after publishing reports on high levels of mercury making tuna unsafe, The New York Times, one of the top newspapers in the US media, published an article which highlighted the ills of meat production and predicted rising environmental consciousness and health effects would lead to lower consumption in the US. 

 

The article noted that the world's meat supply has grown four-fold during the last forty years, growing from 71 million tonnes in 1961 to 284 million tonnes in 2007.

 

According to the article, this increase in meat production has caused great damage to the environment in the form of river pollution, greenhouse gases and the massive volumes of grains which has to sourced through the destruction of huge areas of forested land.

 

The paper cites a UN FAO report that 30 percent of the world's ice-free land is used for livestock production, either directly or indirectly ( in the form of grain production). Livestock production also generates a fifth of greenhouse gases, more than transportation.

 

The article also citied an Environmental Protection Agency report that 75 percent of the water quality problems in the US related to agriculture, much of it in meat production.

 

Higher grain demand to raise meat in wealthy nations also meant higher prices for the same grains which would have been exported to poorer nations who need the grain to alleviate hunger. Throw in ethanol production and the equation becomes even more skewed against poor countries.

 

The paper also cited a Stanford University professor highlighting the inefficiencies of meat production: people could obtain two to five times more the calories from grains if they had directly consumed it than if they were to eat the animal that consumed the grains. In the case of grain-fed beef, it could be ten times more.

 

The article also cites health problems through red meat consumption and antibiotics in meat.

 

However, the main charge carried in the article was that the average US citizen's protein consumption was twice the federal government's recommended allowance.

 

Out of the 110 grammes consumed on  average per day, 75 grammes comes from meat protein sources. The paper suggests a 30 gramme protein consumption based on plant sources would have sufficed.

 

The article suggests better waste management, reduced subsidies and incorporating more technology in livestock breeding and management to reduce pollution.

 

However, the main drive should be geared towards reduced meat consumption and sustainable agriculture, the article suggested.

 

Commentators interviewed on the article said that rising environmental consciousness may lead to a campaign against meat consumption akin to that against cigarettes, highlighting health effects, compassion for animals and environmental consciousness.  

 

Last week, the paper's newspaper carried a report citing lab tests which proved the tunas served in a few New York restaurants contained unsafe levels of mercury, sparking off discussion in other US newspapers about mercury levels in seafood.