San Francisco Chronicle
Wary of red meat
Your article “Regenerative farms fight climate change” (Front Page, June 30) neglected to mention the elephant (or, in this case, the cow) in the room. That is, livestock is responsible for 14.5% of humaninduced greenhouse gas emissions, and livestock plays an outsized role in climate change.
Lionizing regenerative farms that raise livestock is counterproductive to fighting climate change. A draft report from the United Nations’ climate science advisory panel says that halving red meat consumption could reduce foodrelated greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 70% by midcentury.
In addition, the consumption of red meat has been linked to myriad of adverse health effects. These include breast cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, stroke and kidney disease, to name just a few.
Promoting animal agriculture, even when the method is billed as regenerative, is misguided. It is good to encourage regenerative farms that grow plants such as beans, fruits, vegetables and grains for human consumption. We should discourage regenerative farms where the end product is livestock for human consumption.
Red meat is harmful to our health and our planet’s health. We must move away from red meat and toward a more plantbased diet if we hope to win the battle against climate change. Michael Martin, San Francisco