I should have realized, when Richard Branson publicly claimed he would no longer eat beef, that there was a government push coming. Sure enough, our government overlords are doing all they can to turn us into vegetarians. As the Daily Beacon reports,
The federal committee drafting nutrition guidelines continued to stress the importance of moving Americans towards plant-based diets on Friday, arguing that eating less meat and fewer snacks can save the planet.
The 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) held its fourth meeting, again devoting a session to “sustainability,” which will be taken into account for nutrition standards that are used to create policy at the federal level.
The USDA has already demonstrated that it is committed to environmentalist and vegetarian fantasies over any interest in real science. They hired a food activist “to lead its Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, which oversees DGAC.” Sure enough Friday’s meeting
included a presentation by Miriam Nelson, the DGAC’s work group leader for “Environmental Determinants of Food, Diet, and Health.”
“Consistent evidence indicates that, in general, a dietary pattern that is lower in animal-based foods and higher in plant-based foods has a lesser environmental impact and at the same time is more health-promoting than the current American diet,” Nelson said.
Because these government-employed zealots are so confidently repeating these lies as assured science, let me advise readers that their claims are even more indefensible than the climate change scam. They are more indefensible because, in the case of nutrition, there are many more scientists who are completely and loudly opposed to the myth that eating animals is bad.
One place to see this in great detail is the book by the Eco-feminist Lierre Keith, The Vegetarian Myth. When you realize that “plants,” for these food lords, mean mostly grains, Keith gives us an antidote:
Rice, wheat, corn – the annual grains that vegetarians want the world to eat – are thirsty enough to drink whole rivers.
The result has been an unending river of corn, drowning our arteries and our insulin receptors, our rural communities, and poor subsistence economies the world over. The corn comes at a huge environmental toll: there’s a half gallon of oil in every bushel. And it’s essentially a massive transfer of money from the US taxpayer to the giant grain cartels, who are able to command the price of grain to be lower than the cost of production, with all of us making up the difference – five billion dollars in subsidies for corn alone, straight into the pockets of Cargill and Monsanto.
Obviously, I don’t agree with everything about Keith’s very non-Christian perspective (this review is helpful). But her point that one can make an environmental case against grains, and that they are much more prominent than they should be in our diet because we subsidize them, should raise questions about the dogma (and that is all it is) that raising meat to eat is not “sustainable.” Even though modern meat production relies heavily on grains, because subsidized grain is so cheap, it doesn’t require that kind of feed. Animals graze in the wild without any need of special annual crops. They can be pastured as well and raised for food.
Lions and hyenas and humans don’t have a ruminant’s digestive system. Literally from our teeth to our rectums we are designed for meat. We have no mechanism to digest cellulose.
While vegetables are healthy for us, meat is what we were made to eat. It is pathetic that we have a government now dedicated to forcing us into even more emphasis on grains and even less on meat.
There are many reasons to believe that the government has already made us sick by its food recommendations. Now it is going even further in the wrong direction.