Global Heat and Meat

Red meat harms more than your health.

“There is a global tsunami brewing,” says the University of California’s Barry Popkin. “The consensus around the world is that red-meat production – be it pork or beef – uses more water, uses more energy and provides more antibiotics than the production of other foods in our diet.” Meanwhile, the world is rapidly shifting toward eating more animal foods.

“Few understand the enormity of the global water crisis,” wrote Popkin in an editorial published with the US NIH-AARP study. [1]. By 2025, two thirds of the world’s population will live in water-stressed areas, according to “Livestock’s Long Shadow”, a 2006 report from the United Nations. [2]

“In the United States, livestock are responsible for 55 per cent of erosion, 37 per cent of pesticides applied, 50 per cent of the volume of antibiotics consumed and for 32 per cent of the nitrogen load and 33 per cent of the phosphorus load into fresh water resources,” notes the report. (Statistics from other countries weren’t available.)

Even more worrisome: meat’s impact on global warming. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of green house gas emissions – more then transportation, says the UN Report. “That was the shocker to me,” says Popkin.

“I’m not a vegetarian and I’m not going to become one, but I certainly don’t plan to eat much red meat.

Sources:
1. “Reducing Meat Consumption Has Multiple Benefits for the World's Health”, Arch. Internal Medicine, 169:543, 2009
2. UN Report – “Livestock’s Long Shadow” http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.htm

Your Health and Mine