• TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Except that you’re eating way more plants if you eat animals than if you just eat plants, as animals eat lots of plants.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Depends on the animal. Home raised chicken, for instance, can almost live on human lefts.

      Insects also eat things that humans really do not consume, for instance.

      • Teppichbrand@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        An average broiler chicken diet is composed of 42.8% corn and 26.4% soybeans for protein, and about 14% bakery meal.

        Source

        Edit: 25 million chicken are being killed daily in the US.

      • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        No, for each animal you eat you’re eating lots of plants in a really inefficient - and needlessly cruel - way

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          23 hours ago

          I cannot eat grass, ruminant animals can. How is it inefficient for me to eat the animal rather than the grass?

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Because we use the land that could be used to grow enough food to feed many people to grow food for cows, which then feed fewer people. By buying into this system, you’re propagating inefficiency.

            • psud@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Right, we bulldoze forests to make fertile land available. I agree that’s bad, I don’t want celery from that land either

              • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                15
                ·
                22 hours ago

                We’d need less land for crops generally if we were allotting it to human food instead of livestock feed.

          • Evkob (they/them)@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            To add to idiomaddict’s great points, the animals don’t eat exclusively grass. In Australia (assuming based on your instance): “the latest estimate (2017-18) of annual feed use in Australia is 13.58 million tonnes” (SFMCA).

            This includes “cereal grains, legume grains, vegetable protein meals, animal protein meals, cereal milling co-products, minerals and vitamins” as per that same source.

            I often see people use the deforestation of the Amazon for soy crops as a sort of gotcha for vegans, even though most soybeans are grown for use as animal feed (in the Amazon, mainly cattle). Incidentally, cattle farms are also responsible for much more deforestation in the Amazon than soybeans, but I digress.

            I’ll also note that grass-fed beef has often been shown to be as bad (or sometimes worse) for the environment than feedlot beef. It also can’t scale to meet current meat consumption.