Can one be an environmentalist and continue to consume meat?

Some people believe compromise is the be-all and end-all of politics. A glaring example of this is a sub-heading from Sunday’s Nov. 14 Bakersfield Californian, “Almost 200 nations compromise on coal to strike UN climate agreement,” echoing Greta Thunberg’s indictment of global efforts at mitigating climate change which she describes as, “Blah, blah, blah.”

Apparently, the world’s leading scientists agree with her. In 2018, a landmark report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said, “Urgent and unprecedented changes are needed.” They warned, “We only have 12 years to keep global warming at a maximum of 1.5C degrees, otherwise we will face significantly worse drought, floods, extreme heat, and poverty for hundreds of millions of people.”

I tend to compare many things to personal goals such as working out or learning to play a musical instrument. The results are incremental, yet the effort must be consistent, systematic, steadfast and resolute. And then, eventually, noticeable results appear. Compromise essentially equals inertia and failure.

So, if compromise is not the answer, what is? Leadership at the global level is strikingly impotent. A grassroots’ movement is our only hope. In 2018, an Oxford University analysis found that, “Eating plant-based was the single-most effective way of tackling climate change.”

On what basis do they make that claim? As seen in a new documentary called “Eating Our Way to Extinction,” and as confirmed by the UN IPCC report, “Animal agriculture is the leading cause of deforestation. It also contributes to water pollution, soil degradation, ocean dead zones, and emits 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gases,” more than all of transportation combined.

Additionally, animal agriculture is an exceedingly inefficient way to feed the world. It takes 10 pounds of grain to create one pound of meat. Seventy-seven percent of agricultural land is used to graze cattle and grow feed for livestock. Creating space to grow food for animals is the leading driver destroying the rain forest. 80 percent of soybean crops are not eaten by people, but are for livestock production.

And even scarier, 80 percent of antibiotics are given to animals necessitated by their toxic living conditions, leading to reduced efficacy of antibiotic use for humans and resulting in antibiotic resistant infections.

This obsession for growing meat, poultry and dairy products at the sacrifice of other considerations might be understandable if it was a nutritional requirement for human health, but that is an absolutely false myth promoted by corporate interests: big ag, big dairy, and big pharma. If you’re wondering where vegans get their protein, you may want to ask the muscular stallion, the brahma bull, and the mighty ox. The answer is plants.

And on that note, I will take a moment to rant on my latest pet peeve — nutritionists recommending that people eat fish once or twice a week — are they living in a bubble? Why do some professionals hibernate in their specialist box and not connect the dots to see that “A” plus “B” equals “C”? Commercial fishing is decimating the fish population, and is the largest cause of micro-plastics in the sea water due to abandoned fishing nets and tackle. A dead ocean cannot produce fish for consumption, nor oxygen for breathing — a rather important point.

The “Eating Our Way to Extinction” documentary barely touches on the other effects of a meat-centered diet: cruelty to animals in the factory farmed model; and the preventable health tragedies in our communities and families being played out every day. However, its focus on environmental destruction is powerful and provides a steady drumbeat of scientific truths that must be faced if we are going to have a livable world to pass on to our children.