It has often been claimed that avoiding red meat is beneficial to the environment, because it lowers emissions and less land is used to produce alternatives.

But a study by Cranfield University, commissioned by WWF, the environmental group, found a substantial number of meat substitutes – such as soy, chickpeas and lentils – were more harmful to the environment because they were imported into Britain from overseas.

The study concluded: "A switch from beef and milk to highly refined livestock product analogues such as tofu could actually increase the quantity of arable land needed to supply the UK."

The results showed that the amount of foreign land required to produce the substitute products – and the potential destruction of forests to make way for farmland – outweighed the negatives of rearing beef and lamb in the UK.

An increase in vegetarianism could result in the collapse of British farming, the study warned, causing meat production to move overseas where there may be less legal protection of forests and uncultivated land.

They should all be forced to read “The Secret Life Of Plants”.

Potatoes and other vegetables allegedly scream when they’re tossed into boiling water.

Imagine the agony of an innocent french fry, thrown into boiling oil...or helpless, gentle corn, slowly roasted in a camp fire, silent shrieks of lingering agony, unheeded!

Sweet, pacifistic carrots, savagely chopped and shredded....and eaten ALIVE!

A cabbage, quietly minding its own business, suddenly beheaded and hacked into cole slaw!

Oh, the humanity!

[Those cruel, sadistic, vegecidal bastards!]

Tofu can harm environment more than meat, finds WWF study

Becoming a vegetarian can do more harm to the environment than continuing to eat red meat, according to a study of the impacts of meat substitutes such as tofu.

The findings undermine claims by vegetarians that giving up meat automatically results in lower emissions and that less land is needed to produce food.

(edit)

A vegetarian at our table once was talking about how meat and livestock took such a toll on the environment and were so unkind to animals. I indicated the glass of wine she was drinking and asked her if she'd ever visited a vineyard. She answered that yes, she had.

I asked her if she'd considered what had been on those rolling hills before the vineyard was planted. Her face took on a bit of a blank look, and I explained: before the vineyard, those acres were home and a source of food to heaven knows how many critters -- deer, squirrels, mice, lizards, bobcats, coyotes, birds, jackrabbits, and so on. Once the land was cleared and cultivated, all those creatures were displaced.

I asked her about the broccoli on her plate, and if she ever gave much thought to all the water ecosystems disrupted or starved when water was diverted to irrigate those fields of broccoli -- which land, incidentally, also used to be home to all manner of critters before they were cleared and cultivated to grow the broccoli. I asked if she'd ever considered how many cups of broccoli she'd have to eat in order to get the same amount of calcium that I was getting from the single glass of milk that I was having with my own meal.

I asked her if she could name any byproducts from broccoli or vineyards. I pointed out that the critter from which my steak came from had also produced an enormous array of byproducts, such as leather; medicines; glues; bone marrow for gelatin used in everything from marshmallows to (in pre-digital camera days) film; tallow used for all kinds of things including the processing of steel; food for her beloved dog and cats; and chemicals used in such a huge variety of items that even if she never ate meat or wore leather, every day of her life she was a kid of meat eater. I reminded her that she and her kids depended on things made by the partial use of animal byproducts in either the item itself or in its manufacturing process -- the rubber in the tires on her car, the asphalt on the roads she drove, the industrial adhesives that were part of the construction of her home and the buildings where she worked, etc., etc. And I pointed out that in many cases, those animals grazed on open uncultivated land where trees, birds, jackrabbits, bobcats, coyotes, deer, lizards, and all kinds of other critters co-existed without being disturbed.

I could tell that she had never even considered such things, but to be fair, she'd always lived in urban areas and really had very little connection with the way things really work. A skyscraper and a bird's nest are just as "equal" in the big picture; the only REAL difference is that one was made by homo sapiens, and the other was made by birds. We're each as much a part of nature. She thinks that her philosophy puts her closer to nature; I think it alienates her from it.

Yes it is an important issue, because it highlights once again the extreme short-term attitude of the liberal fanatics who infest the west.

This is one of the consequences of buying into Al’s global warming fandango. AGW is caused by too many greenhouse gasses. Beef cattle produce huge amounts of Co2 and (especially) methane. Also, cattle farms involve cutting down the precious rainforest. Therefore we need to eat less beef, which is also very good, because eating beef (for some reason) is very bad for us. Therefore we need to campaign against beef cattle, and one way is to encourage vegetarianism.

You see how the one thing leads to so many others? Because they all tie together, they reinforce each other, which makes it very hard to argue against one aspect. It also illustrates the essential childishness of these people. “Beef is bad, get rid of beef” Simple. They never think of the consequences of that. All the farms that will go out of business, allthe knock on effects on the economy, the fact that we have to inport substitutes, which means transport, which means more CO2 emission, the fact that that makes food more expensive, which pushes some below the poverty line and lessens the amount of money in all of our pockets, which means we buy less of other things, which pushes the economy even more...

If people want to be vegetarians, for whatever reason, that’s fine. I dont see the attraction myself and I think the idea that it is somehow “healthier” is decidedly suspect, but that is their choice. What I object to is all these tree-hugging inteventionist types playing their silly games, affecting ME personally, and looking down their noses at me at the same time. Morons.

Ever seen a truly aggressive vegan? It's because meat replaces lost hormones (testosterone for one) in men. That's one of the hidden reasons behind vegetarianism - it make people passive because they lack the hormones that meat provides.

Look at history. The meat eaters eventually subdued the gatherers.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Adopting a vegetarian diet based around meat substitutes such as tofu can cause more damage to the environment, according to a new study.

Wild boar, the best meat you'll ever put in your mouth.

Tofu can harm environment more than meat, finds WWF study