I see it as a good alternative for meat-eating people.
christian
1

As a meat-eater, or just an omnivore/human, I can only disagree.

Saying it’s a good alternative is pretty subjective, especially when actual meat is so much tastier without all but one ingredient, meat. How many ingredients is required to make these plant-based meats taste anything remotely like meat?

I don’t know about you, but I like based and simple ingredients in my food.

Plant-based meats might potentially have the opportunity to be priced less, if subsidized correctly. The same applies to meat.

The current plant-based bias turn grasslands into farms, which requires loads of water, minerals and pesticides. These lands get depleted of it’s nutrition and pesticides add toxins to the ground. In this end, these farms need to spend a large amount of time and money replenishing the ground with nutrients and remove toxins in order to continue growing crops. This forces cattle into more dense, disease ridden cattle farms. These farms then give the cattle a less optimal food source and antibiotics to stay alive; which not only increase bad fats in the meat and reduce the quality of the meat, but also increase cattle’s methane production.

On the other side… It actually doesn’t take as much resources to raise cattle when you take out the government subsidies on both sides. Especially if they were to actually be given the correct grasslands to feed from and rotated from grasslands to grasslands. This in turn will produce way less methane, naturally fertilize the grasslands and quite probably reduce desertification. The cattle will also require if any antibiotics and be way more healthy in general.

Call me a monkey or whatever, but I would like to thank all these plant-based diets for forcing cattle into unlivable circumstances and blaming meat for health problems.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Gareth David’s story.