That’s the scolding from the EAT-Lancet Commission on Food Planet and Health.
Who is that, you ask? Well, it’s a global non-profit group “examining the impact of food production on the planetary boundaries for greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen and phosphorus, water, land use and biodiversity.”
The full title of their report is: Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems.
Yah, … we had to look up “anthropocene” too.
Wikipedia says it “… is a proposed epoch dating from the commencement of significant human impact on the Earth’s geology and ecosystems, including, but not limited to, anthropogenic climate change.”
Smithsonian magazine says it “has become an environmental buzzword ever since the atmospheric chemist and Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen popularized it in 2000.”
Anyway, according to the self-promoted 37 experts from 16 countries that serve on the commission, by the time they figured in all the relevant “planetary boundaries” under this “proposed epoch,” their bottom line is global beef consumption needs to be cut in half.
Their conclusion is as silly as their report title and academic abstract is pretentious.
In short, more drivel in the war against meat, which seems to be a serial feature in the news media. The last was a report from CNN.
If you want to learn more about how abjectly biased and carelessly reported the CNN coverage was about the supposed climate evils perpetrated by us carnivores, I high recommend this deconstruction of CNN’s shoddy journalism authored by beef industry expert and all around smart guy, Neville Speer.
Professor Speer skewers CNN’s assertions like the cubes of beef on a shish-kabob.
Of course, the global call to cut beef consumption by 50 percent means that much more than half of the U.S. cattle and beef industry would have to be eliminated as the U.S. is one of the largest farming, ranching and beef producing countries in the world.
And as for a scientific analysis of beef production and its lifecycle impact, check out a study by the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service published in the scientific journal Agricultural Systems, Environmental footprints of beef cattle production in the United States.
That scientific analysis takes head-on all the doomy-and-gloomy claims and attempts at guilt provoking over consuming meat, like …
The anti-meat myth-makers claim it takes 24,000 gallons of water to product a pound of beef: in fact it takes only slightly more than 1 percent of that, at 308 gallons.
The climate activists assert that livestock accounts for about 14.5 percent of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; in fact, the latest USDA study pegs total lifecycle emissions from U.S. beef at about 3.3 percent.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, rumors of the planet’s demise due to meat-eating have been greatly exaggerated.