Solution to world hunger? Eat less meat, new study urges

MONTREAL -- A newly published blueprint for doubling the global food supply includes a key suggestion about how everyone can contribute to this increasingly pressing ambition: eat less meat.

An international team of researchers has developed solutions to respond to what it calls one the greatest challenges of the 21st century -- boosting food production while slashing the environmental impact of agriculture.

The research, which will be featured on the cover page of the Oct. 20 edition of the journal Nature, comes as international concern grows over how the planet will feed the rapidly expanding human population.

http://pakagri.blogspot.com/2011/10/solution-to-world-hunger-eat-less-meat.html

We hear this every few months, but the real issue is not "what" we eat, but "how" it is produced.  Trading one mass-produced food item for another mass-produced food item doesn't get us closer to sustainability. There are more vegans/vegetarians in the US than ever before, and yet, the number of hungry people grows daily.  Obviously, it is not as simple as not eating meat.

Also, we currently produce enough food to feed the world and then some.  The biggest obstacle to providing food for everyone isn't production, it is delivery (which includes policitics, economics, etc).

Animals can play an important role in converting non food items (grass, wild foods, compost, etc) into nutrient dense food (meat) for humans.  In a lot of ways, animals can increase the overall efficiency of a food production system, especially when it comes to nutrient cycles.

lets add wastage of food . US is 1 of the biggest waste bin of food

I wouldn't support biofuels, in that huge mono crops are basically burnt to fire engines.  Support wolf hunts to increase wild game which might be key to human life support systems.  Cleanest meat out there.  The wolf agenda partially is an anti gun agenda.

velacreations wrote:

Also, we currently produce enough food to feed the world and then some.  The biggest obstacle to providing food for everyone isn't production, it is delivery (which includes policitics, economics, etc).

Agree 100% with the other things you said. This one, however, sticks out. Enough food is produced (now), but it's produced by drawing down future resources. Toby's video about permaculture being able to save the world but not industrial civilization is instructive.

william

world hunger right now is a problem of distribution not supply

the answer in a lot of the hungry parts of the world is probably more livestock not less though.
http://www.greenuniversity.net/Ideas_to_Change_the_World/AllanSavory.htm
why because grasslands need the large herd animals that they co-evolved with to be healthy

but nothing will solve hunger long term except to limit the growth of population it is the natural course for any species to produce far more offspring than can survive the last two centuries have made us think that that rule does not apply to humans, but we now fill all of the available habitat and some form of selection will begin operating again inside of our lifetimes

I agree with Brice.  Here in my locale it is quite difficult to grow food crops, whereas meat animals, especially wild ones, seem to do pretty well.  It doesn't make sense to require everyone to eat a diet which may not be appropriate for their situation, simply because some people somewhere else are feeding grain to animals.  In my opinion. 

How much of the Earth's biomass can we turn into human mass before the Earth's life systems begin to fail?  Seems like we're reaching that limit. 

I have to admit I wonder how many of these "diet versus diet" threads we need.   

That essay I always post a link to in these threads:  http://www.ishmael.org/Education/Writings/kentstate.cfm

I really want to see someone do a true to life energy balance comparison between a soy munching vegan and a carnivore eating grass fed meat and dairy that way I could actualy offer an answer instead of saying I suspect.

but I suspect that the 90% of the plant matter that is thrown away instead of being consumed like it would be by an environment appropriate grazer and of course the huge energy and water inputs for starchy crops would get the numbers kinda close together.

H Ludi Tyler wrote:
I agree with Brice. 

I have to admit I wonder how many of these "diet versus diet" threads we need.   

thank you I apreciate the validation

and we will keep having these threads as long as the forum cater to folks of diverse dietary habits and strong convictions, I find them reasuring, and even more reasuring that we can all get it said with reasonable civility and

Brice Moss wrote:
even more reasuring that we can all get it said with reasonable civility

Usually!