As the clock continues to wind down on irreversible climate change, it’s more important than ever to have all stakeholders involved and working toward a common goal. But when academic researchers partner with industry, eyebrows often are raised. That’s unfortunate and downright counterproductive.
Julia Child once said the best people are the ones who love to eat.
I think I know what the legendary chef was getting at. There’s so much more to food than nourishment. It feeds souls, it evokes memories, it upholds traditions, it’s part of most of life’s important moments. From milk and cookies to a seven-course gourmet meal, food can say “I love you” in no uncertain terms.
One might expect that a major breakthrough delivered by a well-respected organization – especially when the breakthrough seriously overrides a conclusion drawn merely two years earlier – to be backed by cold, hard facts. And yet, they are woefully absent from a Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) that calls unprocessed red meat an unconditional health risk.
Has the beef industry landed on a metric that finally gives it a rosy glow? Is a new system of measurement absolving the sector from much of the global warming blame it’s been shouldering? And if so, is it all too good to be true?
Dairy will continue to be part of diets around the world, and some regions would likely benefit from more dairy. Given so, looking at reducing its environmental impact will be critical as we tackle climate change. And the WWF is addressing just that in their latest report.
Climate change is the biggest challenge of our lifetime, which we must address with urgency, but swapping out a hamburger once a month isn’t how we do it.
Not only do exaggerated claims against animal protein such as meat distract us from major polluters, they blind us to potential climate change solutions.
By reducing the amount of food that’s lost or wasted, we can improve our greenhouse gas emissions while producing enough food to feed our growing population.
Marketing efforts distract us from the main climate change polluters by disproportionately blaming sectors such as animal agriculture and the products they produce such as meat and dairy.
Burger King has been adding lemongrass to cows’ diets in an attempt to cut down on cattle’s methane emissions. Given the greenhouse gas’ role in climate change, it’s a big deal. If nothing else, decreasing methane would buy us time to try and get a handle on carbon dioxide emissions, the No. 1 elephant in the room – and in the atmosphere.
Imagine if the same time and energy spent attacking livestock were instead spent on the largest climate polluters out there – or even supporting cattle as a part of a climate solution. Yes, cattle can help pull carbon from the atmosphere, and if we work together, we can feed a growing population while also curbing climate change.
The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us we’re in this together. A united, global effort stands the best chance of eradicating this deadly virus. Same goes for the all-important charge to keep our planet from overheating to the point of no return. Climate change solutions are possible, with the right approach.
