Ethics of Eating Meat

From Wittenberg Green Guide

Jump to: navigation, search

While some people may regard the choice of whether or not to eat meat as a simple black-and-white issue, the matter can be more complex depending on one's ethical stances on a number of issues. The purpose of this article is not to make a hard and fast claim about whether or not people should eat meat, but to alert readers to the diverse array of ethical issues surrounding meat consumption.

Contents

[edit]

Animal Welfare

The most unavoidable ethical consequence of eating meat is that an animal must die to provide the meat. For some people, that consideration is sufficient to dissuade them from eating meat at all. For those who do choose to eat meat, they may wish to consider the circumstances under which an animal was raised. In most cases, if a market or restaurant does not make specific claims about the care and feeding of an animal, it may reasonably be assumed to have been raised under less than ideal conditions.

[edit]

Some considerations for animal welfare

  • For cows: Cows are not able to adequately digest corn. While the meat industry tends to bill "corn-fed beef" as a prized commodity, it does so at the expense of both cows and the environment. Corn will fatten a cow significantly (prized by the industry, but not good for the cow), and alters the PH of the cows stomach in a way that promotes the growth of harmful E. coli O157:H7 bacteria[1] (which was responsible for the Fall 2006 spinach/E. coli scare.)
    • Veal: For decades, veal (meat from young calfs) has been a high-profile area of concern for those attuned to animal welfare. It has long been the case that calves raised for veal were kept in small cages that didn't allow them to move much at all. There is now an emerging trend toward raising patured, grass-fed calves for veal, which may allay some of peoples concerns about the ethics of eating veal. If this is a concern for you, you may want to inquire into the conditions under which calves were raised before you buy veal.[2]
  • For pigs: When pigs live in over-crowded conditions, they will tend to bite off their neighbors tails. To prevent this, farmers will peremptorily "dock" (i.e. cut off) pigs' tails.[3]
  • For chickens: Sadly, the labels "free-range" and "cage free" on chickens and/or eggs don't mean as much as you'd hope. While this label does mean that the chickens were not kept in individual crates, they may have been housed in cramped barns, which is little better. Look for chickens labeled as having been "pastured" (at least partially feeding themselves in the field). [4][5]
  • For goats and sheep: any concerns here?
[edit]

Land Use

Raising animals for meat requires more land-per-food-calorie than growing plant-matter for consumption, because feeding animals typically involves growing crops to feed them. 38% of the grain grown throughout the world goes to feed animals raised for their meat. Grain-fed cattle are some of the most crop-intensive livestock to grow, requiring 7kg of grain per 1kg of weight gain. Pigs are somewhat more efficient (4:1). Poultry are more efficient still (a bit more than 2:1), and fish tend to do the best (lesss than 2:1).[6]

  • It also goes into high fructose corn syrup, which is in almost everything, and is an entirely different story. Can someone edit this page appropriately?
[edit]

Environmental Impact

  • The deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest is in part due to the demand of Brazilian beef abroad. The land is being cleared for cattle ranching, creating a direct connection between the beef Americans eat for dinner and the destruction of the world's largest rainforest.

Here is more information: World Appetite for Beef Making Mincemeat Out of Brazilian Rainforest

  • According to the Center for a New American Dream, eating one less beef meal each week saves 300 lbs of carbon emissions each year
[edit]

What about fish?

There are several issues to consider when choosing to eat fish:

  • Is the fish sustainably harvested, or is it being overfished?
  • If the fish is farmed, is it done so in a sustainable and environmentally-friendly way?
  • Are other species harmed by the fishing methods used?
  • Is the fish likely to contain dangerous levels of mercury, pesticides or other contaminants?

The Environmental Defense Network has put together a list of the Best and Worst Seafood Choices, taking all of these matters into consideration. You can also print out their Pocket Seafood Selector to keep with you when shopping or dining. The Monterey Bay Aquarium produces a similar guide called Seafood Watch and also has a pocket guide.

[edit]

References

  1. ↑ Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006. 82.
  2. ↑ Burros, Marian. "Veal to Love, Without the Guilt". New York Times. 18 April 2007.
  3. ↑ Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006. 218.
  4. ↑ Planck, Nina. Real Food: What to Eat and Why. New York: Bloomsbury, 2006. 117-118.
  5. ↑ Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006. 172.
  6. ↑ Brown, Lester R. Plan B 2.0. New York: London, 2004.
[edit]

For Further Reading

Retrieved from "http://www6.wittenberg.edu/green_guide/index.php/Ethics_of_Eating_Meat"
Personal tools