Coming Meat Ban? New Study: Meat-Eaters Emit More Than Twice As Much Greenhouse Gases As Vegans

A new study by researchers in England claim that people who eat lots of meat emit much more CO2 than vegans. Worse: the nutty scientists are urging governments to change dietary guidelines.

At the journal of Climatic Change, Peter Scarborough et al claim that “reducing the intake of meat and other animal based products can make a valuable contribution to climate change mitigation.”

Moreover they urge: “National governments that are considering an update of dietary recommendations in order to define a ‘healthy, sustainable diet’ must incorporate the recommendation to lower the consumption of animal-based products.”

The team of scientists computed the average daily CO2 emissions for 6 different diet groups. Here are their results:

1. high meat eaters: 7.19 kg/day
2. Medium meat-eaters: 5.63 kg/day
3. low meat-eaters: 4.67 kg/day
4. fish-eaters: 3.91 kg/day
5. vegetarians: 3.81 kg/day
6. vegans: 2.89 kg/day

The paper’s abstract follows:

The production of animal-based foods is associated with higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than plant-based foods. The objective of this study was to estimate the difference in dietary GHG emissions between self-selected meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK. Subjects were participants in the EPIC-Oxford cohort study. The diets of 2,041 vegans, 15,751 vegetarians, 8,123 fish-eaters and 29,589 meat-eaters aged 20–79 were assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Comparable GHG emissions parameters were developed for the underlying food codes using a dataset of GHG emissions for 94 food commodities in the UK, with a weighting for the global warming potential of each component gas. The average GHG emissions associated with a standard 2,000 kcal diet were estimated for all subjects. ANOVA was used to estimate average dietary GHG emissions by diet group adjusted for sex and age. The age-and-sex-adjusted mean (95 % confidence interval) GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per day (kgCO2e/day) were 7.19 (7.16, 7.22) for high meat-eaters ( > = 100 g/d), 5.63 (5.61, 5.65) for medium meat-eaters (50-99 g/d), 4.67 (4.65, 4.70) for low meat-eaters ( < 50 g/d), 3.91 (3.88, 3.94) for, 3.81 (3.79, 3.83) for vegetarians and 2.89 (2.83, 2.94) for vegans.

In conclusion, dietary GHG emissions in self-selected meat-eaters are approximately twice as high as those in vegans. It is likely that reductions in meat consumption would lead to reductions in dietary GHG emissions.”

The science road to disaster

It’s rather frightening that scientists are now attempting to urge governments to promote extremely dubious if not dangerous diets onto the population, all based on the junk science of global warming. Should scientists narrowly focused on one topic be in the business of advising governments on matters concerning nutrition.

The low-fat/high carb diet massively promoted by western governments and corrupt food and pharmaceutical industries over the course of the 21st century, and based on junk science, has already led to a nutrition genocide where tens of millions of people are now dying slow/painful deaths from cardiovascular disease, cancer, record obesity and diabetes. Now a worsening of the human diet is being pushed.

Governments are gearing up to take an already catastrophic nutritional situation and to turn it into global mass murder by mal-nutrition and starvation. It’s mass human sacrifice, all being justified by the superstition and nonsense of a man-made climate catastrophe – in the year 2100 or 2200.

Skeptical climate scientists who have remained silent so far better start speaking up very soon. This movement has been taken over by some real nut-cases, and threatens to really get out of hand.

Watching/listening to the following videos may save your life or extend it 10-20 years:
Oiling of America
How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity Epidemic
Wheat Murder (skip first 6 mins.)

And if you think veganism is good for you, then look at what it does to kids:
Tree-Hugging Vegetarian Environmentalists…Just Look At Their Kids!

 

15 responses to “Coming Meat Ban? New Study: Meat-Eaters Emit More Than Twice As Much Greenhouse Gases As Vegans”

  1. Steve Brown

    Beans make me fart, rare steak doesn’t.
    QED

    1. Graeme No.3

      Steve:
      for your sake don’t tell the lentilmunchers that. They will calculate that your CO2 footprint** is almost as big as Al Gore’s and put you first in line to be disposed of.

      ** I wonder how your foot emits CO2? Have they lentilmunchers evolved a way of by-passing the CO2 emission test?

    2. John Silver

      We cannibals don’t fart at all.

  2. DirkH

    A big round of refreshing Frozen Kale Ice Cubes for everyone!
    (yes, that is a thing.)
    http://www.shellyinreallife.com/2014/02/frozen-kale-ice-cubes-for-green.html

  3. BobW in NC

    The reported study smacks of anthropology, a social science, since it uses questionnaires. Notice that it is not hard science…

    For example: Meat eaters (n = maybe 40?) were not taken into the laboratory, divided randomly into two groups of 20 each, exhaled CO2 (respiration, not flatulence…that’s methane) measured for base line after fasting from meat with a vegan diet for a couple of weeks, and then the test group fed steaks, rib roasts, hamburgers (I’m getting hungry!) for several weeks for breakfast, lunch, dinner… Control group…well too bad; they still get a vegan diet. Then, within a reasonable time, exhaled CO2 remeasured, If it rose, fine. If not, the reported study is falsified. Either CO2 is greater or it is not.

    What rot!

  4. diogenese2

    What a wonderful world I live in that, at my age, the belief that I have seen everything is constantly shattered by emergent absurdity surpassing anything I have previously observed. How sad that so much time and earnest analysis has been spent on a mass of data to produce a work of absolutely no use to any man or beast on the planet. Please, anybody, show me any value at all in this work of “science”.
    And Pierre, much as I admire your work and perceptions please get a sense of proportion about your idea of “nutritional genocide”. Note that in the developed world the (misnamed) “life expectancy” that is , age of death, is inexorably rising (though inevitably must plateau). The human being is not an immortal entity.
    flawed by avoidable error but a being programmed to decay and expire. The long term mortality rate is 100%.
    No government dietary initiative in my country (UK) has ever made any detectable change in peoples habits or in any health outcome, nor will whilst people can choose their own lifestyle. Get real – energy is the issue.

  5. DirkH

    Vegan Sex shop in Berlin, sells animal ingredient free Dongs, whips made from bicycle tire rubber instead of leather. Made by Berlin artists. I am not making this up.
    http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/berlin/alternativer-sexshop-in-kreuzberg-vegane-kondome-und-peitschen-aus-fahrradschlaeuchen,10809148,27607332.html

  6. Paul

    Large herbivores such as cows, hippos, elephants and buffalo all produce relativly large amounts of methane due to their diet. Since methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2 then are we going to have a wholesale
    cull on all of these animals to “save the planet”?

    1. cementafriend

      Sorry, your intensions maybe good but you are wrong about methane. It has a much narrower absorption band than CO2 at a short wavelength around 7.6 micron. The information around methane is “Green” propaganda. The heat absorption of methane in the atmosphere is so small it is not measurable.

  7. lemiere jacques

    from my point of view, as long gdp is correlated with carbon emission, the only way to reduce carbon footprint is a wealth diet….
    the point is some nuts are going to look at some point in our way of life thet don’t like and say you must stop it because carbon emission…

    so you can fly around the world in a private jet if you don’t eat meat?

    the point is unavoidable if you have 1000 euros in your pocket your carbon foot print doesn’t depend much if not at all on your way of life…vegan or not it is the same…

    but greens hate that because people would never accept to be poorer to reduce their carbon footprint…

    carbon footprint…and well it is quite certain that if you reduce your carbon footprint you will probably increase your” planetary” footprint ;
    we are supposed to use more than one planet with fossil fuel…without fossil fuel we would need 5 or 6…

  8. John F. Hultquist

    I like nuts and seeds in various dishes and there is nothing better than a freshly picked corn on the cob roasted over an open fire – and as long as the fire is going other roasted things are good too – steak, chicken, salmon, pork ribs. As for “saving the planet” – look for the video by George Carlin.

  9. Ike

    off topic

    […] FIFA has denied Greenland membership because a grass pitch cannot be sustained in such a cold climate, and that is the only valid surface for regulation football.[…] lol

    lets hope that cc will help the poor greenlanders.

    http://uk.ask.com/wiki/Football_Association_of_Greenland

    Regards
    Ike

  10. Loodt Pretorius

    I really don’t mind more guys becoming vegetarians. I couldn’t care two hoots about my carbon footprint and will blow smoke rings at any person that mentions it in my presence. I am hoping that the normal laws of economics – supply and demand – will prevail and that my meat eating habit, unlike my nicotine habit, will get cheaper in time.

  11. Streetcred

    Vegans and their various related types are a sub-species … humans are meat eaters having evolved from the gatherers eating roots, shoots and leaves … vegans et al have yet to evolve.