Vegetarians Are The People To Save The World?
- Mar 30, 2018 -

13 weeks of 2018


Imagine that if I was made up of a lotus pond under the moonlight of a spring breeze, it was suddenly called in by an old man: young man, I see your bone marvel, a rare genius for a thousand years, eat vegetarian, and save the world in the future. What a great and sacred duty to save the world, and there must be a great doubt about it: is this one of the iron man war Altman?

If a vegetarian saves the world, even if it is too rare, how about a group of vegetarians? Note that the United Nations climatology expert at that time said: if there is no meat day every day, the effect of emission reduction is better than driving less. One of the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, lazin de Park Qiao Li once said, "less meat can save the earth." He was chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on climate change and has long been concerned about global warming.

Meat production is producing a lot of greenhouse gases, which makes the earth's temperature exceed normal level. This point is believed by many readers. Worse still, environmentalists say that ruminants such as cattle and sheep can release large amounts of greenhouse gas methane by burping and farting, which will accelerate the process of global warming. As a result, some scholars have pointed out that the dinosaurs were likely to be extinct because such a monster could eat too much, and fart constantly, releasing a lot of methane into the atmosphere, and eventually destroying the ozone layer to cause a devastating climate.

Reducing the impact of animal farming is one of the focuses of environmental policy. The United Nations report shows that 20% of the global greenhouse gas emissions come from the animal breeding industry, which is more than all the world's emissions of cars, ships, planes and trains. The methane produced by animal excrement is 23 times more methane than that produced by traffic tools, and produces 296 times more nitrogen than the Nitrous Oxide produced by traffic tools; it also produces ammonia, which causes acid rain and acidification of the ecological environment. Almost 2/3 of global ammonia emissions come from livestock.

Britain's former environmental minister, BenBradshaw, said that if climate change continues to lose control, the British people may return to the form of food quotas during the two World War. Bradshaw pointed out that the impact of the food production process on the greenhouse effect is equal to the impact of private transportation, and the consumption of meat in the diet is a long-term solution to the stability of climate change.

During the Second World War, because of the German blockade, the Danish government was worried about the lack of food crisis. The Danish vegetarians' Association designed the food coordination plan. The Danish people were greatly improved in wartime health and the death rate was greatly reduced. At that time, ordinary citizens ate only rough bread, porridge, potatoes, vegetables and dairy products. Norway also has the same experience. They have reduced consumption of meat food, increased grain and vegetables, at the same time, at the same time, the deaths caused by circulatory diseases were greatly reduced. After the war, Norway returned to pre war eating habits, and the mortality rate of circulatory disease recovered to pre war. Level.

Having said so much, readers must think that Xiaobian is a vegetarian or a vegetarian diet. Of course not! It's not realistic or advisable for the whole nation to eat a vegetarian. Livestock will produce large amounts of greenhouse gases, but it is impossible to ban grazing altogether. For example, in the sub Saharan Africa, livestock emissions of methane may be replaced by wild herbivore and termites, which may increase the number of wild herbivorous animals and termites because they do not have to compete for food with livestock.

Although most livestock today eat grain that can be eaten, most of the time in human history, cattle and sheep are grazing on pastures that are not suitable for cultivated land, and they turn the unedible grass into meat and milk. 800 million people in the world are still hungry for a long time, so stopping the production of this unsuitable land will only aggravate the food crisis. In addition, for semi-arid or hilly areas, proper grazing has less ecological damage than planting crops.

Even pigs and chickens that do not eat grass need not be fed with grain. They can eat leftovers from people. Tara Garnett, a network of food and climate research at the University of Surrey in the UK, says domestic pigs are the most useful trash cans, and the leftovers are given to it, the garbage is treated, and the meat can be returned. In this way, livestock help to deal with 30% to 50% of the food that is supposed to be wasted, and also contribute more calories and protein to human beings - the lack of a vegetarian world. Unfortunately, most pig farms use cereal as a feed.

Even the most fanatical vegetarians admit that for poor countries, dairy products and even meat are good. Although there is no doubt that reducing meat consumption is certainly conducive to the environment, it can not be said that people in the world are vegetarians. For the 800 million poor rural residents around the world, raising a couple of livestock may be the only hope they can increase their income, and a small amount of animal protein can greatly improve the quality of the diet.

If it's not so extreme, will it be a better way to give up meat but still suck and egg? After all, milk and eggs are the most efficient way to produce animal calorie after factory feeding. Unfortunately, in reality, livestock feeding systems that only produce egg milk are impracticable. Helmut Habbe Le, of the Vienna Institute of social ecology, said: it is difficult to adopt the diet of only milk and no meat, because there are no cows that produce milk and no meat, and cows must be produced every year, and only half of them are cows. Although some vegetarians are unwilling to kill their lives for reasons of faith, there is no need to waste so much meat in reality. There is no chicken with only eggs and no meat. So although the world without meat sounds beautiful, even in Utopia, it is impossible to have no animal products at all.

How should the problem be solved? Of course, looking for alternatives to meat protein, such as beans is a good choice. A European scientific research project called TRUE, a scientist, claims to increase the consumption of beans in Europe, helping to improve the world's headaches, such as hunger and global warming.

In any case, plant protein materials - such as peas, soya beans and lentils - show the highest density of nutrients and the lowest cost of environmental production, the research team says. For example, pea's nutritional density and environmental footprint are about five times the same amount as mutton, pork, beef or chicken. In other words, when compared with beef and mutton, people can get more nutrients from each peas and cause less environmental damage.

After applying these environmental and nutritional indices to a series of dietary schemes, Irish researchers have calculated the benefits of reducing the amount of animal protein intake to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase nutrient concentrations. The researchers point out that quantitative estimates of sustainable food and agriculture help consumers to make wiser choices when considering the main protein components in their diet.

Not long ago, studies by Quorn Foods showed that the protein found in vegetarian food had no difference in muscle benefit to animal protein. DuPont nutrition and health expanded its plant - based 90% protein block, and Kerry launched ProDiem-- a plant protein complementary combination at the European food show in Geneva, including peas, rice and oats to improve the amino acid score corrected by protein digestibility (PDCAAS). So, in order to save the earth, we must eat meat and fight Call for love beans.

March 30, 2018