The Ominous Beef Cover Up:
The Hidden Truth Behind the Meat on Your Plate
Posted by Dr. Mercola | March 23 2010
Of all the animals that humans eat, none are held more responsible for climate change than cows. Cows not only consume more energy-intensive feed than other livestock, they also produce more methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.
But grass-fed cows may have the opposite effect.
Grass is a perennial. If cattle and other ruminants are rotated across pastures full of it, the animals' grazing will cut the blades, spurring new growth, while their trampling helps work manure and other decaying organic matter into the soil, turning it into rich humus. And healthy soil keeps carbon dioxide underground and out of the atmosphere.
Currently, 99 percent of U.S. beef cattle live out their last months on feedlots, where they are stuffed with corn and soybeans. Much of the carbon footprint of beef comes from growing grain to feed the animals, which requires fossil-fuel-based fertilizers, pesticides, and transportation.
Even though grass-fed cattle produce more methane than conventional ones (high-fiber plants are harder to digest than cereals), their net emissions are lower because they help the soil sequester carbon.
Sources:
Time Magazine January 25, 2010
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
Although this Time magazine article goes into some of the details about how cows may be partly responsible for global warming, I think the MAIN point here is the very real difference between conventionally-raised, grain-fed livestock, and organically-raised, grass-fed cows as it pertains to both your health, and the health of the planet as a whole.
The differences between the two are so vast; you’re really talking about two different animals, and two separate industries with entirely different farming practices and environmental impact.
As reported in Time magazine above, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization released a report in 2006 entitled Livestock’s Role in Climate Change and Air Pollution. In it, they estimate that 18 percent of the world’s man-made greenhouse-gas emissions are produced by livestock. This information was heralded by vegetarians and environmentalists alike as proof that eating meat was bad not only for you, but for the entire planet.
But, it’s important to realize that this detrimental effect comes from modern farming practices, not from cows being raised naturally as they were designed to be
The carbon footprint of conventional farming is mainly due to the unnatural feed that these animals are given, which requires lots of fossil fuels. Many don’t think about this, but fossil fuels are used in everything from the fertilizers and pesticides that are sprayed onto the crop to the transportation of the feed.
Grass does not require fossil fuels to grow (rotating pastures does the job instead), and other health harming practices, such as injecting the livestock with hormones and antibiotics, are also not allowed in organic farming.
This equates to healthier meat, a healthier you, and benefits to the planet.
Courtesy: Dr. Mercola's Newsletter
Posted by Dr. Mercola | March 23 2010
Of all the animals that humans eat, none are held more responsible for climate change than cows. Cows not only consume more energy-intensive feed than other livestock, they also produce more methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.
But grass-fed cows may have the opposite effect.
Grass is a perennial. If cattle and other ruminants are rotated across pastures full of it, the animals' grazing will cut the blades, spurring new growth, while their trampling helps work manure and other decaying organic matter into the soil, turning it into rich humus. And healthy soil keeps carbon dioxide underground and out of the atmosphere.
Currently, 99 percent of U.S. beef cattle live out their last months on feedlots, where they are stuffed with corn and soybeans. Much of the carbon footprint of beef comes from growing grain to feed the animals, which requires fossil-fuel-based fertilizers, pesticides, and transportation.
Even though grass-fed cattle produce more methane than conventional ones (high-fiber plants are harder to digest than cereals), their net emissions are lower because they help the soil sequester carbon.
Sources:
Time Magazine January 25, 2010
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
Although this Time magazine article goes into some of the details about how cows may be partly responsible for global warming, I think the MAIN point here is the very real difference between conventionally-raised, grain-fed livestock, and organically-raised, grass-fed cows as it pertains to both your health, and the health of the planet as a whole.
The differences between the two are so vast; you’re really talking about two different animals, and two separate industries with entirely different farming practices and environmental impact.
As reported in Time magazine above, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization released a report in 2006 entitled Livestock’s Role in Climate Change and Air Pollution. In it, they estimate that 18 percent of the world’s man-made greenhouse-gas emissions are produced by livestock. This information was heralded by vegetarians and environmentalists alike as proof that eating meat was bad not only for you, but for the entire planet.
But, it’s important to realize that this detrimental effect comes from modern farming practices, not from cows being raised naturally as they were designed to be
The carbon footprint of conventional farming is mainly due to the unnatural feed that these animals are given, which requires lots of fossil fuels. Many don’t think about this, but fossil fuels are used in everything from the fertilizers and pesticides that are sprayed onto the crop to the transportation of the feed.
Grass does not require fossil fuels to grow (rotating pastures does the job instead), and other health harming practices, such as injecting the livestock with hormones and antibiotics, are also not allowed in organic farming.
This equates to healthier meat, a healthier you, and benefits to the planet.
Courtesy: Dr. Mercola's Newsletter
posted by Jacques Girard, Ph.D. at 12:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home