i need a website next to statistics like how much home it takes to produce a pound of meat vs the amount of arrive to produce grain... or dampen, how much water to incline an animal vs a crop. i want numbers!
Answer:
Improving Personal Health
It's no secret that compared to average meat-eaters, vegetarian generally live longer, are smaller amount likely to be overweight, suffer far a lesser amount of incidences of cancer and heart disease, and have more dynamism. These facts have be consistently borne out by decades of scientific research. The largest epidemiological study ever conducted (the China-Oxford-Cornell study) concluded that those ingestion the amount of animal foods in a typical American diet own seventeen times the death rate from heart disease, and, for women, five times the rate of breast cancer, than those who go and get 5% or less of their protein from animal foods. (See the reference at the end of this article.)
Meat contains 14 times the amount of pesticides as plant foods, since pesticides find concentrated as they move up through the food chain, and since they're more effortlessly stored in fatty tissues. In 1980, six years after the pesticide dieldrin be banned, the USDA destroyed two million packages of frozen turkey products contaminated next to dieldrin. (And such contamination can routinely occur lacking detection.) In 1974, the FDA found dieldrin in 85% of adjectives dairy products and 99.5% of the American people. The EPA discovered that the breast milk of lacto-vegetarian women contained far lower levels of pesticides than that of average Americans. A study reported within the New England Journal of Medicine found that "The highest level of contamination in the breast milk of the vegetarian was lower than the lowest horizontal of contamination…(in) non-vegetarian women… The mean lacto-vegetarian levels be only 1-2% as dignified as the average levels contained by the U.S."
Saving the Earth
All food animals consume several times more grain than they produce as meat. So several times as much park is needed to grow grain to nurture animals, several times as much energy is used to gather the grain and transport it, several times as much hose down is necessary, several times as much pesticides, etc. Worldwide petroleum reserves would be exhausted contained by 11 years if the rest of the world ate like the U.S. The least possible energy-efficient plant food is 10 times as efficient as the most reorganized meat food. A nationwide switch to a pure lacto-vegetarian diet would allow us to cut our oil import by 60%.
Over half of the wet used in the U.S. is used to grow nurture for livestock. It takes 100 times as much hose to produce meat than to produce wheat. The water required to produce a day's diet for a typical American is 4,000 gallons. (It's 1,200 for vegetarian and 300 for vegans.) Compared to a vegan diet, three days of a typical American diet requires as much sea as you use for showering all year (assuming you shower every day).
U.S. Livestock produce 250,000 pounds of surplus per second -- 20 times as much as humans. A large feedlot produces as much spend as a large city, but minus a sewage system. Animal waste wash into rivers and lakes cause increased nitrates, phosphates, ammonia, and bacteria, and decrease the oxygen content. This kills plant and animal life span. The meat industry account for three times as much lethal organic gamble away as the rest of the industries in the U.S. combined.
It take ten times as much land to produce food for an average American compared to a pure lacto-vegetarian. An acre of land can produce 20,000 pounds of potatoes, but solely 165 pounds of beef. In the U.S., 260 million acres of forest have be destroyed for use as agricultural land to support our meat diet (over 1 acre per person). Since 1967, the rate of deforestation have been one acre every five second. For every acre cleared for urban development, seven acres are cleared to graze animals or grow nurture for them.
Around 85% of topsoil loss is directly associated with raise livestock. We have lost 75% of our topsoil. The USDA say crop productivity is down 70% as a result of topsoil loss. It takes temperament 500 years to build an inch of topsoil. Vegan diets make smaller number than 5% of the demands on the soil as meat-based diets.
Caring for Animals
Around eight billion animals are killed for food every year within the U.S. alone -- a number greater than the entire human population of the planet. Each meat-eating American eats the equivalent of almost 24 animals per year. What's worse, modern agricultural methods mean that animals are raise in cramped confinement operation instead of the pastures from childhood picture books -- a practice agreed as factory farming. Chickens are crammed into cage with no free space, and are debeaked to hang on to them from pecking each other to disappearance. Animals are pumped full of various powerful drugs to waste diseases resulting from filthy living conditions, and to make them grow or produce faster than personality intended. When cows and chickens stop producing as much milk and eggs as the younger animals, they're unceremoniously slaughtered and made into low-grade meat (fast food and pet food). For some, vegetarianism and veganism are ways to refuse to involve yourself in in the commodification of animals.
go to http://www.notmilk.com adjectives the imformation vegetarian inevitability on the environment, health benifits or animal crualty is on this site.
hmmm... thats a difficult question...
I can't remember the source, but It takes 3.5 hectares to provide food for a meat base diet & .5 hectares for a plant based diet for like peas in a pod amount of food.
It uses more, yes, but in actual fact, not that much more food could be grown were adjectives the animals farms within the world to be turned into crop farms. Most of the parkland used for animals would be unsuitable for crops, or at least endow with too poor a yield to engineer it worthwhile. This is because crops need a sure climate, relief (they can't grow on steep ground, whereas animals can still graze) and quality of soil. In most of the territory used for pastoral farming these factor just aren't flawless enough to imply much more food could be grown there.
Less meat can be get from a field as if it be used for growing crops, but this is because crop farming is greatly intensive in comparison. While animals want a lot of space to run around and graze, plants don't and a grazing land can be practically packed to the rafter. This of course is more straining on the soil than meat and worse for local wildlife, as at smallest they can still live in a grazing land full of cows, whereas they can't in a pasture of crops, not least due to the chemicals sprayed upon it.
Also, meat uses more river than grain. Well rice uses several times more river than that. Does this mean we should stop ingestion rice? No, of course not, and this selective argument against meat is terrible for exactly equal reasons.
The conclusions base on these argument by vegetarianst are that meat production is wasteful and more food could be grown if it didn't exist and thus solve orld hunger. This is completely false. Not keeping animals wouldn't know how to solve world hunger, even though more food could be grown on that land. The article is there is already adequate food to feed the world several times over, and huge amounts jump to waste every year. The reason world hunger exists is that associates can't afford it. Also, giving a country free food would destroy their cutback. No one would buy the locally grown stuff, if there be free food around, and the food industry and the millions employed by it would all turn bankrupt next to no one buying their stock.
More Questions & Answers...
Answer:
Improving Personal Health
It's no secret that compared to average meat-eaters, vegetarian generally live longer, are smaller amount likely to be overweight, suffer far a lesser amount of incidences of cancer and heart disease, and have more dynamism. These facts have be consistently borne out by decades of scientific research. The largest epidemiological study ever conducted (the China-Oxford-Cornell study) concluded that those ingestion the amount of animal foods in a typical American diet own seventeen times the death rate from heart disease, and, for women, five times the rate of breast cancer, than those who go and get 5% or less of their protein from animal foods. (See the reference at the end of this article.)
Meat contains 14 times the amount of pesticides as plant foods, since pesticides find concentrated as they move up through the food chain, and since they're more effortlessly stored in fatty tissues. In 1980, six years after the pesticide dieldrin be banned, the USDA destroyed two million packages of frozen turkey products contaminated next to dieldrin. (And such contamination can routinely occur lacking detection.) In 1974, the FDA found dieldrin in 85% of adjectives dairy products and 99.5% of the American people. The EPA discovered that the breast milk of lacto-vegetarian women contained far lower levels of pesticides than that of average Americans. A study reported within the New England Journal of Medicine found that "The highest level of contamination in the breast milk of the vegetarian was lower than the lowest horizontal of contamination…(in) non-vegetarian women… The mean lacto-vegetarian levels be only 1-2% as dignified as the average levels contained by the U.S."
Saving the Earth
All food animals consume several times more grain than they produce as meat. So several times as much park is needed to grow grain to nurture animals, several times as much energy is used to gather the grain and transport it, several times as much hose down is necessary, several times as much pesticides, etc. Worldwide petroleum reserves would be exhausted contained by 11 years if the rest of the world ate like the U.S. The least possible energy-efficient plant food is 10 times as efficient as the most reorganized meat food. A nationwide switch to a pure lacto-vegetarian diet would allow us to cut our oil import by 60%.
Over half of the wet used in the U.S. is used to grow nurture for livestock. It takes 100 times as much hose to produce meat than to produce wheat. The water required to produce a day's diet for a typical American is 4,000 gallons. (It's 1,200 for vegetarian and 300 for vegans.) Compared to a vegan diet, three days of a typical American diet requires as much sea as you use for showering all year (assuming you shower every day).
U.S. Livestock produce 250,000 pounds of surplus per second -- 20 times as much as humans. A large feedlot produces as much spend as a large city, but minus a sewage system. Animal waste wash into rivers and lakes cause increased nitrates, phosphates, ammonia, and bacteria, and decrease the oxygen content. This kills plant and animal life span. The meat industry account for three times as much lethal organic gamble away as the rest of the industries in the U.S. combined.
It take ten times as much land to produce food for an average American compared to a pure lacto-vegetarian. An acre of land can produce 20,000 pounds of potatoes, but solely 165 pounds of beef. In the U.S., 260 million acres of forest have be destroyed for use as agricultural land to support our meat diet (over 1 acre per person). Since 1967, the rate of deforestation have been one acre every five second. For every acre cleared for urban development, seven acres are cleared to graze animals or grow nurture for them.
Around 85% of topsoil loss is directly associated with raise livestock. We have lost 75% of our topsoil. The USDA say crop productivity is down 70% as a result of topsoil loss. It takes temperament 500 years to build an inch of topsoil. Vegan diets make smaller number than 5% of the demands on the soil as meat-based diets.
Caring for Animals
Around eight billion animals are killed for food every year within the U.S. alone -- a number greater than the entire human population of the planet. Each meat-eating American eats the equivalent of almost 24 animals per year. What's worse, modern agricultural methods mean that animals are raise in cramped confinement operation instead of the pastures from childhood picture books -- a practice agreed as factory farming. Chickens are crammed into cage with no free space, and are debeaked to hang on to them from pecking each other to disappearance. Animals are pumped full of various powerful drugs to waste diseases resulting from filthy living conditions, and to make them grow or produce faster than personality intended. When cows and chickens stop producing as much milk and eggs as the younger animals, they're unceremoniously slaughtered and made into low-grade meat (fast food and pet food). For some, vegetarianism and veganism are ways to refuse to involve yourself in in the commodification of animals.
go to http://www.notmilk.com adjectives the imformation vegetarian inevitability on the environment, health benifits or animal crualty is on this site.
hmmm... thats a difficult question...
I can't remember the source, but It takes 3.5 hectares to provide food for a meat base diet & .5 hectares for a plant based diet for like peas in a pod amount of food.
It uses more, yes, but in actual fact, not that much more food could be grown were adjectives the animals farms within the world to be turned into crop farms. Most of the parkland used for animals would be unsuitable for crops, or at least endow with too poor a yield to engineer it worthwhile. This is because crops need a sure climate, relief (they can't grow on steep ground, whereas animals can still graze) and quality of soil. In most of the territory used for pastoral farming these factor just aren't flawless enough to imply much more food could be grown there.
Less meat can be get from a field as if it be used for growing crops, but this is because crop farming is greatly intensive in comparison. While animals want a lot of space to run around and graze, plants don't and a grazing land can be practically packed to the rafter. This of course is more straining on the soil than meat and worse for local wildlife, as at smallest they can still live in a grazing land full of cows, whereas they can't in a pasture of crops, not least due to the chemicals sprayed upon it.
Also, meat uses more river than grain. Well rice uses several times more river than that. Does this mean we should stop ingestion rice? No, of course not, and this selective argument against meat is terrible for exactly equal reasons.
The conclusions base on these argument by vegetarianst are that meat production is wasteful and more food could be grown if it didn't exist and thus solve orld hunger. This is completely false. Not keeping animals wouldn't know how to solve world hunger, even though more food could be grown on that land. The article is there is already adequate food to feed the world several times over, and huge amounts jump to waste every year. The reason world hunger exists is that associates can't afford it. Also, giving a country free food would destroy their cutback. No one would buy the locally grown stuff, if there be free food around, and the food industry and the millions employed by it would all turn bankrupt next to no one buying their stock.
More Questions & Answers...