That chart omits the animal deaths caused by farming. 97% of cows are fed grain. It takes 10X the grain/calorie to produce beef than to simply eat the grain. About 40 mice/yr/acre die as a result of conventional farming. Just eat the micehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205259/Making-meal-mice-Malawi.html …
Also, consider calories from meat/animal products per animal deaths or years of suffering. One can be ethically about 90% vegan by just cutting out chicken, eggs, and farmed fish, and eating beef and cheese instead. http://www.animalvisuals.org/projects/data/1mc/ …pic.twitter.com/I5OoLFGZ08
-
-
-
FWIW poultry, fish, and eggs are far more environmentally sustainable than is beef. Ofc best options are vegetarianism/veganism, but if your key issue is animal suffering, it’s not clear to me why you would focus on short-term suffering rather than cumulative long-term suffering
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Eating beef in place of chicken is a ridiculous proposition. Ethically farmed produce is the answer, not eating one type of protein over another.
-
Why is it 'ridiculous' to reduce animal suffering by more than 90%?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.