America Is Done Pretending About Meat

[playtime]

i eat mostly chicken & turkey but i enjoy grilled beyond burgers w/ cheese & when i make enchiladas or meatloaf, i use 1/2 beyond burger & 1/2 beef & it's quite tasty.

 

[Woodznutz]

They just keep recycling the same arguments over and over and over

If I recall you vegans started the argument. And you still haven't addressed the global impact of your position. Meat eaters are in the catbird seat on this one.

What's that old saying, "There's nothing worse than a reformed drunk (or meat eater).

 

[Carl in Michigan]

 

[Concerned American]

View attachment 1129651

Are you convinced now? LMAO

 

[westwall]

View attachment 1129651

 

[Carl in Michigan]

What's that old saying, "There's nothing worse than a reformed drunk (or meat eater).

Only to a drunk. Clearly, the reformed drunk has a message you need to hear. Something you need to talk about?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

How excuse filled cadaver eaters see vegans

 

[Woodznutz]

Only to a drunk. Clearly, the reformed drunk has a message you need to hear. Something you need to talk about?

I might be a reformed drunk. Ya never know.

 

[Woodznutz]

How excuse filled cadaver eaters see vegans

Reasons are not excuses. You don't have the moral high ground to make such assertions.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

If I recall you vegans started the argument. And you still haven't addressed the global impact of your position. Meat eaters are in the catbird seat on this one.

What's that old saying, "There's nothing worse than a reformed drunk (or meat eater).

Well..global impact eh?

It takes 2 acres per omnivore to feed him--200 acres per 100

It takes 1/2 of an acre to feed the Vegetarian--50 acres per 100

ChatGPT stats:

1. Feeding 100 Vegetarians​

A vegetarian diet (including dairy and eggs) requires significantly less land than an omnivorous diet.

• Average land needed per vegetarian per year: ~0.5 acres
  (varies between 0.3 and 0.6 acres depending on diet specifics and farming methods)

100 vegetarians x 0.5 acres = ~50 acres

---

2. Feeding 100 Omnivores​

An omnivorous diet, especially with a high intake of meat and dairy, requires substantially more land due to the inefficiency of raising animals (feed, pasture, etc.).

• Average land needed per omnivore per year: ~2 acres
  (range: 1.5 to 3 acres depending on meat consumption level and agriculture type)

100 omnivores x 2 acres = ~200 acres

---

Summary:​

Diet Type	Land per Person	Land for 100 People
Vegetarian	~0.5 acres	~50 acres
Omnivore	~2 acres	~200 acres

Why the Difference?​

• Animal products require more crops (for feed) and more water.
• Grazing and feed crops take up vast tracts of land.
• Vegetarian diets are more efficient in converting plant calories directly to human calories.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Well..global impact eh?

It takes 2 acres per omnivore to feed him--200 acres per 100

It takes 1/2 of an acre to feed the Vegetarian--50 acres per 100

ChatGPT stats:

1. Feeding 100 Vegetarians​

A vegetarian diet (including dairy and eggs) requires significantly less land than an omnivorous diet.

• Average land needed per vegetarian per year: ~0.5 acres
  (varies between 0.3 and 0.6 acres depending on diet specifics and farming methods)

---

2. Feeding 100 Omnivores​

An omnivorous diet, especially with a high intake of meat and dairy, requires substantially more land due to the inefficiency of raising animals (feed, pasture, etc.).

• Average land needed per omnivore per year: ~2 acres
  (range: 1.5 to 3 acres depending on meat consumption level and agriculture type)

---

Summary:​

Diet Type	Land per Person	Land for 100 People
Vegetarian	~0.5 acres	~50 acres
Omnivore	~2 acres	~200 acres

Why the Difference?​

• Animal products require more I bits good someone crops (for feed) and more water.
• Grazing and feed crops take up vast tracts of land.
• Vegetarian diets are more efficient in converting plant calories directly to human calories.

Thank you. This should be so obvious I didn't bother. But it's good someone did

 

[Woodznutz]

Well..global impact eh?

It takes 2 acres per omnivore to feed him--200 acres per 100

It takes 1/2 of an acre to feed the Vegetarian--50 acres per 100

ChatGPT stats:

1. Feeding 100 Vegetarians​

A vegetarian diet (including dairy and eggs) requires significantly less land than an omnivorous diet.

• Average land needed per vegetarian per year: ~0.5 acres
  (varies between 0.3 and 0.6 acres depending on diet specifics and farming methods)

---

2. Feeding 100 Omnivores​

An omnivorous diet, especially with a high intake of meat and dairy, requires substantially more land due to the inefficiency of raising animals (feed, pasture, etc.).

• Average land needed per omnivore per year: ~2 acres
  (range: 1.5 to 3 acres depending on meat consumption level and agriculture type)

---

Summary:​

Diet Type	Land per Person	Land for 100 People
Vegetarian	~0.5 acres	~50 acres
Omnivore	~2 acres	~200 acres

Why the Difference?​

• Animal products require more crops (for feed) and more water.
• Grazing and feed crops take up vast tracts of land.
• Vegetarian diets are more efficient in converting plant calories directly to human calories.

Couple of things.
What do you do with the hens once they stop laying eggs?
What do you do with the calf that causes the cow to produce milk?
How do you maintain the fertility of the soil without animal manures?
Where do you get that wonderful material called "leather"?

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Couple of things. What do you do with the hens once they stop laying eggs?
What do you do with the calf that causes the cow to produce milk?
How do you maintain the fertility of the soil without animal manures?

I'm not a vegetarian--BTW..although I think that eating a diet that is 80% plant-based is far healthier, in the long run.
Just an opinion..that being said...

Well..I'll go with the obvious--the hen gets slaughtered and sold.

The calf (if male) usually gets neutered, fed up until big enough for market and slaughtered and sold.

Fertility--sort of depends. Crop rotation, mulching and letting fields lie fallow all have their part to play in that.
Most fertilizer is synthetic these days.

Where Does Fertilizer Come From? The Surprising Truth - GardenerBible

The world's growing population and increasing food demands have put immense pressure on agricultural production, leading to a surge in the use of fertilizers.

gardenerbible.com

Adding fertilizer increases yields, for sure...but NOT adding fertilizer does not drop yields to zero, or anything close to it.

50 acres vs 200 acres per person...if planned inefficiencies doubled the acreage required for vegetarian diet--it would STILL be 100% more efficient in feeding the world.

Assuming, of course, that feeding the world is an issue that concerns you~

 

[Woodznutz]

Well..I'll go with the obvious--the hen gets slaughtered and sold.

The calf (if male) usually gets neutered, fed up until big enough for market and slaughtered and sold.

Fertility--sort of depends. Crop rotation, mulching and letting fields lie fallow all have their part to play in that.
Most fertilizer is synthetic these days.

Where Does Fertilizer Come From? The Surprising Truth - GardenerBible

The world's growing population and increasing food demands have put immense pressure on agricultural production, leading to a surge in the use of fertilizers.

gardenerbible.com

Adding fertilizer increases yields, for sure...but NOT adding fertilizer does not drop yields to zero, or anything close to it.

50 acres vs 200 acres per person...if planned inefficiencies doubled the acreage required for vegetarian diet--it would STILL be 100% more efficient in feeding the world.

So, you're still raising animals for others to eat. If you eat eggs and dairy, you still have one foot in the meat market.

The world's poor are fed mostly cereal grains now.

Including animals in agriculture can bring marginal lands into high productivity. Vegetable farming can't do this.

Regarding the ratios mentioned, people eat five times as much meat as is needed. So, you can refigure those ratios.

I've gotten away from eggs for breakfast. I just add a little more peanut butter to my toast.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

So, you're still raising animals for others to eat.

The world's poor aren't fed meat, mostly cereal grains.

Including animals in agriculture can bring marginal lands into high productivity. Vegetable farming can't do this.

I have zero idealistic, ethical or moral issues involving an omnivore vs vegetarian diet.

That out of the way--protein is vital..and the majority of protein is both manufactured/grown/raised in 1st world countries.
Not a lot of protein, comparatively speaking, being made available to the poor of the world...meat-based or not.

Including animals in agriculture..which, BTW, I've not seen any great move to exclude them, is fine.
One need not ranch for cattle, sheep or pork--to have a few around..if that's your concern?

This lil conversation started with a discussion of efficiency..and I've yet to be shown that animal-based ranching is any more efficient than plant-based farming--in fact, everything I read points in the opposite direction.

Now, if the conversation is about profitability, farming plant-based crops STILL makes one more money, in the majority of cases, than animal ranching.

The profitability of cattle ranching vs. plant-based farming depends on several variables like location, scale, market demand, input costs, climate, and long-term strategy. Here's a balanced breakdown:

---

Quick Comparison​

Category	Cattle Ranching	Plant-Based Farming
Startup Costs	High (land, livestock, fencing, feed)	Medium (land, seeds, equipment)
Operating Costs	High (feed, water, vet care, labor)	Moderate (labor, irrigation, pest control)
Revenue Potential	High per unit (beef, milk, leather)	High per acre if diversified (vegetables, fruits, legumes)
Profit Margins	Often narrow due to high costs	Can be higher, especially in niche/organic markets
Market Volatility	High (affected by disease, prices, climate)	Moderate (price-sensitive but diverse options)
Scalability	Moderate (requires more land, infrastructure)	High (greenhouses, vertical farming, rotation)
Environmental Impact	High (emissions, land/water use)	Lower (especially regenerative practices)

Plant-Based Farming is often more profitable per acre when​

• You're in or near a high-demand market (urban areas, farm-to-table, CSA).
• You grow high-value crops (e.g., microgreens, berries, herbs, organic produce).
• You use efficient methods (e.g., hydroponics, greenhouses, vertical farming).

Cattle Ranching can be profitable when:

• You have access to large, inexpensive grazing land.
• You're selling into a strong market (grass-fed beef, organic meat).
• You integrate operations (e.g., feed production, direct sales, by-products like hides).

 

[Woodznutz]

View attachment 1129651

70 y/o carnivore. Slim and trim, still climbing trees. I'm 85 now and still kickin' it.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Very nice essay..hit quite a few nails on the head. The gist of it is simple...for most of us, the plant-based diet was more about social compulsion and less about actual desire.

I used the Yahoo link to get around the Atlantic paywall.

America Is Done Pretending About Meat

Plant-based eating has lost its appeal.

www.yahoo.com

A few snippets..it's a longish essay:

Making America healthy again, it seems, starts with a double cheeseburger and fries. Earlier this month, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. visited a Steak ’n Shake in Florida and shared a meal with Fox News’s Sean Hannity. The setting was no accident: Kennedy has praised the fast-food chain for switching its cooking oil from seed oil, which he falsely claims causes illness, to beef tallow. “People are raving about these french fries,” Kennedy said after eating one, before commending other restaurants that fry with beef tallow: Popeyes, Buffalo Wild Wings, Outback Steakhouse.

To put it another way, if you order fries at Steak ’n Shake, cauliflower wings at Buffalo Wild Wings, or the Bloomin’ Onion at Outback, your food will be cooked in cow fat. For more than a decade, cutting down on meat and other animal products has been idealized as a healthier, more ethical way to eat. Guidelines such as “Eat Food. Not Too Much. Mostly Plants” may have disproportionately appealed to liberals in big cities, but the meat backlash has been unavoidable across the United States. The Obama administration passed a law to limit meat in school lunches; more recently, meat alternatives such as Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat have flooded grocery-store shelves, and fast-food giants are even serving them up in burgers and nuggets. It all heralded a future that seemed more tempeh than tomahawk steak: “Could this be the beginning of the end of meat?” wrote The New York Times in 2022.

Now the goal of eating less meat has lost its appeal. A convergence of cultural and nutritional shifts, supercharged by the return of the noted hamburger-lover President Donald Trump, has thrust meat back to the center of the American plate. It’s not just MAGA bros and MAHA moms who resist plant-based eating. A wide swath of the U.S. seems to be sending a clear message: Nobody should feel bad about eating meat.
Many people are relieved to hear it. Despite all of the attention on why people should eat less meat—climate change, health, animal welfare—Americans have kept consuming more and more of it. From 2014 to 2024, annual per capita meat consumption rose by nearly 28 pounds, the equivalent of roughly 100 chicken breasts. One way to make sense of this “meat paradox,” as the ethicist Peter Singer branded it in The Atlantic in 2023, is that there is a misalignment between how people want to eat and the way they actually do. The thought of suffering cows releasing methane bombs into the atmosphere pains me, but I love a medium-rare porterhouse.

Just eat a balanced meal.

 

[g5000]

Very nice essay..hit quite a few nails on the head. The gist of it is simple...for most of us, the plant-based diet was more about social compulsion and less about actual desire.

I used the Yahoo link to get around the Atlantic paywall.

America Is Done Pretending About Meat

Plant-based eating has lost its appeal.

www.yahoo.com

A few snippets..it's a longish essay:

Making America healthy again, it seems, starts with a double cheeseburger and fries. Earlier this month, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. visited a Steak ’n Shake in Florida and shared a meal with Fox News’s Sean Hannity. The setting was no accident: Kennedy has praised the fast-food chain for switching its cooking oil from seed oil, which he falsely claims causes illness, to beef tallow. “People are raving about these french fries,” Kennedy said after eating one, before commending other restaurants that fry with beef tallow: Popeyes, Buffalo Wild Wings, Outback Steakhouse.

To put it another way, if you order fries at Steak ’n Shake, cauliflower wings at Buffalo Wild Wings, or the Bloomin’ Onion at Outback, your food will be cooked in cow fat. For more than a decade, cutting down on meat and other animal products has been idealized as a healthier, more ethical way to eat. Guidelines such as “Eat Food. Not Too Much. Mostly Plants” may have disproportionately appealed to liberals in big cities, but the meat backlash has been unavoidable across the United States. The Obama administration passed a law to limit meat in school lunches; more recently, meat alternatives such as Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat have flooded grocery-store shelves, and fast-food giants are even serving them up in burgers and nuggets. It all heralded a future that seemed more tempeh than tomahawk steak: “Could this be the beginning of the end of meat?” wrote The New York Times in 2022.

Now the goal of eating less meat has lost its appeal. A convergence of cultural and nutritional shifts, supercharged by the return of the noted hamburger-lover President Donald Trump, has thrust meat back to the center of the American plate. It’s not just MAGA bros and MAHA moms who resist plant-based eating. A wide swath of the U.S. seems to be sending a clear message: Nobody should feel bad about eating meat.
Many people are relieved to hear it. Despite all of the attention on why people should eat less meat—climate change, health, animal welfare—Americans have kept consuming more and more of it. From 2014 to 2024, annual per capita meat consumption rose by nearly 28 pounds, the equivalent of roughly 100 chicken breasts. One way to make sense of this “meat paradox,” as the ethicist Peter Singer branded it in The Atlantic in 2023, is that there is a misalignment between how people want to eat and the way they actually do. The thought of suffering cows releasing methane bombs into the atmosphere pains me, but I love a medium-rare porterhouse.

Less than 7 percent of Americans eat the recommended daily amount of fruits and vegetables.

This makes them abnormal and they should not be allowed to marry each other.

.

 

[Woodznutz]

Less than 7 percent of Americans eat the recommended daily amount of fruits and vegetables.

This makes them abnormal and they should not be allowed to marry each other.

.

So, the 7 percent are 'normal' and the 97 percent are 'abnormal'?

I searched in vain for the RDA of fruits and veggies for an 85 y/o man who weighs 145 pounds and works a physical job for 40 hours/week.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

70 y/o carnivore. Slim and trim, still climbing trees. I'm 85 now and still kickin' it.
View attachment 1144095

That's NOT why I don't eat dead animals. I follow Jesus, the apostles and the prophets.

I know you really love that picture. You post it over and over and over. Soon you will deeply repent. I've been there.

56K views · 1.9K reactions | We just can’t win 😭 And yes, when I’m eating vegan ice cream, I’m intending to be healthy. (definitely) | Danny Ishay

We just can’t win 😭 And yes, when I’m eating vegan ice cream, I’m intending to be healthy. (definitely)

www.facebook.com