A tax on red meat?...
Discussion
LDN said:
Meat will be coming from the USA from what I understand and is already imported now from all over...
I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
From a land management point of view, I'd much rather see food coming from mixed agriculture than crop monocultures and factories. I'm not happy with the status quo either, and what I would rather see would substantially increase the cost of meat, but it's not the same as what you'd rather see.I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
otolith said:
LDN said:
Meat will be coming from the USA from what I understand and is already imported now from all over...
I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
From a land management point of view, I'd much rather see food coming from mixed agriculture than crop monocultures and factories. I'm not happy with the status quo either, and what I would rather see would substantially increase the cost of meat, but it's not the same as what you'd rather see.I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
LDN said:
otolith said:
LDN said:
It's not the same, you're right. But back to the OP; rather than a tax on meat; you'd have it better quality and costing a lot more?
A meat tax would have the same effect. It would be massively beneficial for human health to reduce the consumption of highly processed, industrially produced meat. If we were encouraged to only eat meat rarely ( maybe once or twice a week ) from local, sustainable sources and pay a lot more for it, that would be a good thing for everyone.
The meat industry and brainwashed people into thinking that we must eat meat every day. It is simply a case of bad conditioning - we are told over and over again that we should eat it, all the while the same meat industry has almost completely erased any sense of where it actually comes from.
I think it is likely, thankfully, that the beginning of the end of this period has started. Young people are turning away from it. Quite right too.
toppstuff said:
LDN said:
otolith said:
LDN said:
It's not the same, you're right. But back to the OP; rather than a tax on meat; you'd have it better quality and costing a lot more?
A meat tax would have the same effect. It would be massively beneficial for human health to reduce the consumption of highly processed, industrially produced meat. If we were encouraged to only eat meat rarely ( maybe once or twice a week ) from local, sustainable sources and pay a lot more for it, that would be a good thing for everyone.
I think it is likely, thankfully, that the beginning of the end of this period has started. Young people are turning away from it. Quite right too.
Edit: formatting fail
LDN said:
otolith said:
LDN said:
Meat will be coming from the USA from what I understand and is already imported now from all over...
I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
From a land management point of view, I'd much rather see food coming from mixed agriculture than crop monocultures and factories. I'm not happy with the status quo either, and what I would rather see would substantially increase the cost of meat, but it's not the same as what you'd rather see.I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
otolith said:
LDN said:
otolith said:
LDN said:
Meat will be coming from the USA from what I understand and is already imported now from all over...
I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
From a land management point of view, I'd much rather see food coming from mixed agriculture than crop monocultures and factories. I'm not happy with the status quo either, and what I would rather see would substantially increase the cost of meat, but it's not the same as what you'd rather see.I'm glad you agree about the antibiotic resistance; it's another angle on this not being discussed; generally. It's crazy. But another reason for so called 'clean meat' not grown from sentient animals at all; but in labs.
toppstuff said:
The cognitive dissonance here is breathtaking.
Simple fact of the matter is that industrialised meat production is an environmental disaster on a global scale.
People do not seem to appreciate the vast numbers involved - 2 billion chickens and 200 million pigs a year just in the US are raised and killed. That is a simply massive consumer of resources.
Most scientists seem to agree that it takes 7kg of vegetable protein to create 1kg of cow.
It is a massively inefficient way of feeding the planet.
To raise such huge numbers of creatures to eat as fast as possible, we pump antibiotics into the animals and raise them in unnatural ways.
We should reduce meat consumption. Cut out meat for 5 days a week and then only eat ethically raised, out-door bred meat at weekends that is not full of antibiotics.
It is not hard to figure out.
why ? you will face no issue in your life time, and neither will anyone else on here alive today as a result of eating meat, intensive farming,global warming, climate change,extreme weather, global cooling or any other bullsSimple fact of the matter is that industrialised meat production is an environmental disaster on a global scale.
People do not seem to appreciate the vast numbers involved - 2 billion chickens and 200 million pigs a year just in the US are raised and killed. That is a simply massive consumer of resources.
Most scientists seem to agree that it takes 7kg of vegetable protein to create 1kg of cow.
It is a massively inefficient way of feeding the planet.
To raise such huge numbers of creatures to eat as fast as possible, we pump antibiotics into the animals and raise them in unnatural ways.
We should reduce meat consumption. Cut out meat for 5 days a week and then only eat ethically raised, out-door bred meat at weekends that is not full of antibiotics.
It is not hard to figure out.
t story used to keep the masses sated with their required daily fear quotient and paying their taxes.the planet is finite as is the human race. this delusion that everything will remain as is or better if only we do something cracks me up. especially when espoused by apparently intelligent people. beyond people i know that are alive before i die, i really couldn't give a toss whether the human race lasts a millennium or a century. it will come to an end as will the planet at some point. do what makes you and yours happy while you are here.
wc98 said:
i really couldn't give a toss whether the human race lasts a millennium or a century.
Thanks for your service to the human race, citizen. I'm sure your kids are proud and their kids too. At least they know they don't have to build a memorial or bother turning up at your funeral, as you don't care if they survive or not. DDg said:
They’re doing great guns in the USA; I think the UK launch was delayed due to massive demand in the states!
wc98 said:
why ? you will face no issue in your life time, and neither will anyone else on here alive today as a result of eating meat, intensive farming,global warming, climate change,extreme weather, global cooling or any other bullst story used to keep the masses sated with their required daily fear quotient and paying their taxes.
the planet is finite as is the human race. this delusion that everything will remain as is or better if only we do something cracks me up. especially when espoused by apparently intelligent people. beyond people i know that are alive before i die, i really couldn't give a toss whether the human race lasts a millennium or a century. it will come to an end as will the planet at some point. do what makes you and yours happy while you are here.
If bowel cancer and heart disease make you happy, then fill your boots.t story used to keep the masses sated with their required daily fear quotient and paying their taxes.the planet is finite as is the human race. this delusion that everything will remain as is or better if only we do something cracks me up. especially when espoused by apparently intelligent people. beyond people i know that are alive before i die, i really couldn't give a toss whether the human race lasts a millennium or a century. it will come to an end as will the planet at some point. do what makes you and yours happy while you are here.
Your fear quotient comment has some merit. Some people shout "the environment" for exactly the same reasons that others shout "immigration". And food faddism is of course rife. But that doesn't mean that there isn't also good quality science in the public domain.
It's worth going back to where this thread started. Some researchers estimated the health impact of eating processed meat. That's an entirely reasonable endeavour. And it's equally reasonable to say that the UK population would on average live longer, healthier lives if they reduced their consumption of processed meat. Those are scientific assertions and can be challenged by pointing out flaws in their analysis or by presenting new and contradictory data. Saying "faddism" or "conspiracy" doesn't really cut it.
The leap from the science to the conclusion "therefore tax it" is huge and takes out of the scientific domain and squarely into politics. I think it is rather unhelpful when the latter becomes the main headline. It encourages people who might reasonably object to the political recommendation to also irrationally reject the underlying science as if they are a single package that must either be entirely accepted or entirely rejected.
grumbledoak said:
We should remember also that "where this thread started" was a relative risk from epidemiological studies of 1.14. The usual figure for even considering causality is 2. But this isn't your usual science, this is vegan science.
Awww, you started off so credibly with talk of reference to epidemiological studies and all that, only to throw in a dumb generalist statement at the end that wrecked all your good work...You don't win an argument that way.
DDg said:
"The product – which will cost £5.50 for a pack of two"Only a minimum of £11 to feed a family of four then
Oakey said:
DDg said:
"The product – which will cost £5.50 for a pack of two"Only a minimum of £11 to feed a family of four then
Oakey said:
DDg said:
"The product – which will cost £5.50 for a pack of two"Only a minimum of £11 to feed a family of four then
As well; most here are arguing that meat prices increase...
toppstuff said:
otolith said:
toppstuff said:
we pump antibiotics into the animals
Who is this "we"?http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-05-1687_en...
Chickens are pumped with antibiotics simply to prolong their lives long enough to gain weight to slaughter - if left naturally they would succumb to diseases because of the unnatural way they are raised. Like it or not, if you eat out in restaurants you probably eat this stuff.
Even if you manage to avoid it. Most of the world does not.
If people want to export food to the UK, it has to meet our standards, we don't routinely use antibiotics and the times when they are used, have withdrawal periods before they can go into the human food change.
Antibiotics are expensive and as I said above have withdrawal periods. Milk is tested every day, 365 days a year for antibiotics. If the dairy finds any in the milk, you're in trouble. This has been the case as long as I can remember. The withdrawal period for intramammary antibiotics is, IIRC circa 7 milkings. It's often a few months for the meat. They're generally a last resort because you don't want the animals getting ill in the first place. In high-intensity stocking such as indoor pigs and poultry, they will operate a one out all out system where the group of animals stay together from start to finish as a batch. If there is no infection, the group will stay clean. Issues arise with animals being introduced to a group bringing disease in. So, when the group is moved on to whatever the next stage is, they go out as one, he building is cleaned and disinfected and a fresh group brought in so the risk of disease transfer is minimised.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff