US Beef

With at least 375 million vegetarians worldwide (some for religious reasons, others through choice or because they can't afford meat), there's plainly no need to eat beef, rosecarmel.

Any toxins an animal is exposed to or ingests tend to accumulate in it's flesh. That applies to us too, of course. It's a really good reason to give up meat eating.

www.peta.org/living/food/meat-contamination/



www.peta.org/living/food/meat-contamination/

Pesticides (including residual banned toxins in soil) are rather more difficult to avoid.

www.pan-uk.org/health-effects-of-pesticides/

Reading the PETA link and the amazing thing is that there are any humans left on earth at all when so many of us guzzle all these dreadful pathogens, toxins etc etc on a daily basis.

However, although there is a lot of science talk in the writ-up there is not one reference in the whole article, so it is impossible to check the veracity or reliability of anything they say.

Life is full of toxins, pathogens etc. It always has been and always will be. just because a food stuff contains something noxious doesn't necessarily mean it is doing us damage. I have already referred to solinin in potatoes (and aubergines), oxalic acid in onions and rhubarb. red kidney beans have been a source of poisoning when they were not cooked properly.

Your arguments. Hetty could be used to warn people not to eat any plant material, but stick to meat!

Monica
No you are wrong, both systems produce meat that is safe for us to eat it’s the freedom that other countries have to dictate welfare standards that differ, stocking rates, slaughter supervision, veterinary supervision, management supervision and traceability. Add to that environmental regulation which in many countries does not exist and economy of scale, if consumers want a free for all, fine but realize what you are buying.

Scrapie in sheep has nothing to do with what animals eat it is a rare sporadic condition just like CJD in humans and BSE was in cattle. The BSE epidemic was caused because an official lowering of temperature processing animal protein There had been no problem for many decades until then, nobody foresaw the effect.

On most Beef production systems Cows are kept at pasture (or range} calves are born and live with their mothers for 6 or 8 months then weaned and either finished in yards or on pasture. Age at finishing varies from 12 months up to 24 months depending on buyers requirement, a typical beef animal would need 3 or 4 months on a cereal diet to reach prime condition, very different to your assertion that it’s whole life is cereal fed.
Some beef cattle are dairy bred reared in groups on milk substitute (baby milk) then then fed a mixed diet or grazed depending on season to enable them to grow, reaching prime condition at 18 months or so.

Most beef (and sheep} systems are based on grass or other forage and all would be given some cereal supplement in the final months to give an acceptable finish. So most beef cattle are fed a mixed diet of forage and cereals and that would vary a great deal according to climate, season, age and breed of cattle.

Much of the land grass or other forage crops are grown is totally unsuitable for vegetable growing, too dry, too wet, too steep, shallow soil, so the area left for vegetable growing would be much less than many vegetable advocates say. In addition because no organic fertilizer from animals is available much more chemical fertilizer would be needed, vegetable crops also need weed and pest control whereas grass needs very little, so that not especially sustainable is it. All plants need a certain quantity of nutrients to grow and produce crop, it does not matter if it is organic or chemical or a combination, no nutrients no crop.

On this basis I submit that converting the world to vegetarian diets will not feed a population of 8 billion today let alone future population growth, despite the assertion of some so called experts every government agrees that a mixed diet is the way to feed the population.

David, you mention 'prime condition' as if it's a good thing. It may be good for the product (nicely marbled meat) but an unnatural diet of too much cereal with inadequate fibre is dangerous for cattle, causing painful ulcers, abscesses, liver damage and bacterial infections.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/05/010511074623.htm

You are completely off-course in your thinking about land use and meat production. It is very inefficient compared to crop production If the whole world became vegan there would be plenty of land left over. People would generally be a lot healthier too!

www.sciencefocus.com/science/the-thought-experiment-what-would-happen-if-everyone-on-the-planet-suddenly-went-vegan/

Certainly more land could be used for growing a variety of crops instead of solely soy and corn- Far as the eye can see, clear out to the horizon- Corn- Not so much as a stray heirloom tomato growing in a ditch to break up the monotony-

Where I live is rock and clay- We amended the soil, year after year- After year .. Nothing- The "vegetable" garden is now all wildflowers with some herbs mixed in-

There is no conclusive evidence that eating nothing but vegetables is healthier than eating a balanced diet- Its strictly a preference-

Also ..

Google Lake Erie algae blooms ..

Now tell me growing vegetables is "better" ..

Where do growth hormones fit into all that, David?

Hetty
Prime condition is the covering of fat and the weight of animal that the buyer wants, buyers do not want too much or too little and pay accordingly, how that is achieved varies depending on the breed and system of rearing.

The digestive problems you suggest is rubbish, great care is taken that digestion is efficient and enough fiber is part of that, very few cattle if any are fed an all cereal diet in the U.K. most would be fed a forage based complete diet carefully calculated, cereals would be a part of that and that would include so called “grass fed” beef.

Beef and Sheep production is less efficient than Pork or Chicken that is always totally cereal fed, but all ruminant animals have to digest fibrous diets that other animals cannot.

Growstuff
Growth hormones are used in the US to increase the growth rate of Beef cattle. In the U.K. they were banned over 25 yrs ago their effect was dramatic, it was possible to convert a scrawny cow into prime beef in 3 or 4 months, just like anabolic steroids in a body builder.

Those who continue to eat beef need to know about the real difference in quality of natural, grass-fed meat:

www.farmdrop.com/blog/grass-fed-vs-grain-fed-beef-difference/

Perhaps there will be a move (in the UK) towards far less meat consumption but a demand for higher welfare standards and better quality.

All
I’m not a meat producer but I do know what happens on farms in the U.K. and most other countries, the Americas, Africa and Australasia
Most of the so called expert reports are either biased or misreported by biased journalists. As individuals you can choose to buy Organic, Vegetarian or Vegan it’s your choice but to suggest 8 billion people could have adequate nutrition is very wrong

Hetty

The link you provide is exactly what I mean about biased it is an article promoting the virtues of Organic Grass fed Beef delivered to your door by Farmdrop it is a straightforward marketing tool

There is no way our world can continue to support it's population with the present increase in meat production so there has to be a drastic change - or ultimate destruction. Veganism or vegetarianism is the future.

Biased reporting is, of course, largely driven by commercial interests. I fail to find any logic in your assumptions, David, when meat production is so inefficient and damaging to the environment.

Personally, as an animal lover, I'd find it impossible to eat meat. I'd only think of all the cruelty involved:

www.peta.org/living/food/top-10-reasons-eat-cows/

David I really wish you would read my posts more carefully. I have never at any point suggested that we should be vegetarian or that all land should be used for grow crops.

In previous posts I have explicitly said that I am an omnivore and intend to remain one and I have also made it clear that I am aware that there are large areas of land that are not suitable for crop growing and are best used for animal pasture. Other marginal land needs to be pastured by animals for their fertilising ability before being used for crops every couple of years. It is the basic principal, behind the old principle of mixed farming, where a farm would grow crops and rear animals with the input from each component on the farm feeding into the groweth of the next.

It is a very seductive, this idea of standards being unified so that trade flows free, but this always means standards being lowered so that some countries are expected to reduce their level and forms of animal safety and protection to meet those with lower standards. I can not think of one good reason why we should do this.

Once again, you misquote me. I have never said that any beef animals are fed through out their lives on cereals. I have acknowledged and have always known that they start their lives on pasture, but they are moved to feeding lots when well under a year and then finished rapidly on a diet of corn and growth promoters, as you yourself say. I am more than happy to eat beef which has been raised the traditional way, primarily on pasture with some minor food supplementation from other sources, and no use of growth promoters

As for the relationship between scrapie and BSE. Your own FDA said last year: Although the origin of the disease (BSE) is uncertain it may have resulted from the feeding of scrapie containing meat and bone meal (MBM) to cattle or from feeding cattle MBM derived from a cow or other animal that developed the disease due to a spontaneous mutation.
www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/.../ucm111482.htm

The world is currently producing more than enough food to feed its current and future populations. Famine is a political problem not a food production problem. Up to a third of the food we produce fails to reach the market because of poor processing, preserving and transport problems and in the UK, shamefully, it is estimated that the average household throws out £700 of of uneaten edible food each year.

If you care to read the recent UN report news.un.org/en/story/2019/08/1043921 or the IDDRI report on An Agroecology for Europe 2050 www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Etude/201809-ST0918EN-tyfa.pdf, now available in English on the IDDRI site. You will see that the world can be more than adequately fed by a less intensive industrial agriculture that concentrates on the quality of what we eat and not its quantity and ensures the quality of our soils to be able to continue to feed world populations into the future and not just us in our lifetimes.

Ironic that some people voted to leave the EU to stop live animal transportation, but animal welfare standards in the US are practically non existent, so we would have to get rid of our regulations to meet their lower standards. Michael Gove is already talking of deregulation as one of the "benefits" of Brexit.

Interesting and informative post, MOnica. Thank you.

I was wondering if David had read your previous post too. It reads like a set lecture to students who already know something.

The reference to cows being in prime condition seems to refer to the American obsession with marbled meat and has nothing to do with other qualities of beef or animal welfare.

Yes, David, I know what growth hormones do to cattle and why they were banned. That's the main topic of this thread, because it seems likely that the US will insist we accept cows which have been fed growth hormones.

David, You really do seem to be missing the point!!

For those who need evidence - reasons to reduce meat intake:

www.energylivenews.com/2019/08/08/eat-less-meat-to-help-tackle-climate-change-says-un/?fbclid=IwAR0_lLeEUiXsI2uNs8P2D6oIAv1kR7Pvt3YPUv8yx0iIolAFWcsTYAAA3Hs

Hetty, With all due respect, I'm sure all of are aware that there are reasons to become vegetarian. I really don't think that enforcing it on the population by importing meat full of nasties is the way.

This is a little off point, but I’m curious. In a vegetarian world what will Welsh sheep farmers and other upland farmers do when there are no sheep or livestock? I assume the land will be forested where possible?

What will graze down the pastures which so many of our wildflowers and birds need? In fact will there be pastures if so much land has to be put over to veg growing? How will the soil cope without animal muck - much of the fens is suffering from lack of substance being returned to the earth.

Is there a publication on how the British countryside in particular will look and cope with only arable farms? My knowledge of farming is extremely limited so I’d really like to know more.

Monica here is your quote, and it sounds to me that you object to feeding corn to cattle.

“To begin with cattle in industrial farms being fattened for market are fed corn, soy and derivatives, but cattle are ruminant animals, whose natural diet is grass based and whose digestion is not adapted to eat grain, yet all these safety and welfare standards do not ban the feeding of corn to cattle.”

The reality is that most cattle receive some extra high energy feed mixed with a mostly forage diet, the ruminant digestive system is quite adaptable but does need some fiber, if forage is in short supply nutrition can be made up by other feed.

There is much we agree on and I am pleased about that