Veganism and vegetarianism: Critical analysis
Currently, global warming on Earth has increased due to the poor care we have given to this same. Therefore, many countries have tried to take measures to prevent warming from increasing, as well as campaigns to raise awareness in people in a global way about what is happening. Some of the measures that recommend various campaigns are: take care of water, not throw garbage, save electricity, etc. However, there is one of them that in recent years has had a lot of controversy, but it does not help at all. Veganism and vegetarianism, no matter how many organizations recommend it will not help take care of the environment and avoid the increase in global warming. Next, I will explain with three arguments why veganism and vegetarianism will not help take care of the environment and its resources.
Lierre Keith is a feminist and ecological writer who wrote a book called "The vegetarian myth". She became a vegetarian for 20 years with the purpose of caring for the environment and also her health until her body could no longer bear that diet. In the book he explains how he realized that vegetarianism was not as they showed it in campaigns and was getting worse. He also argues, together with the doctor in philosophy of nature and the environment and spokesman of an organization called Greenpeace that, although some people choose to have a diet based on vegetables to prevent livestock (which is the industry that damages the mostto the earth) continue to grow, most do not know that agriculture equals. Agriculture is one of the most damaging industries, since many crops use synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, which causes a great environmental imbalance. This has several ecological consequences;From a pollution produced in soils and land, until endangered a kind of living beings such as bees that make the role of pollinizing.
Another reason why these types of diet would not help the environment is because, according to FAO (the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization), if livestock begins to disappear drastically, there would be damage to ecosystems. This occurs because animals, when grazing, help prevent forest fires. In addition, animals provide manure to fertilize crops and help subtract the amount of fertilizers used for crops. The consumption of meat should not necessarily disappear, since “if animal consumption is reduced by 30%, by 2050 all livestock in the world could be ecological."
The last argument by which a vegetarian or vegan diet would not help the environment is therefore an omnivorous diet. If there is more demand for a product, more and in the case of vegetables are needed, more land is needed to expand its cultivation. Such is the case of avocados in Mexico, a study by "The Conversation" revealed that because it is the country that produces 30% of the 4.7 million tons that are harvested worldwide, much of the jungles in Mexico has had to be deforest. Like the rice that occurs in 162 million hectares in the world (12% of crops in the world), according to ECLAC one of the highest carbon footprints in the world because it produces a lot of methane that damages our atmosphereand produces pollution.
In conclusion, we can see how a vegan or vegetarian diet is not a diet that will help environment. A diet where it is only based on vegetables still believes that there will be a lot of production of a product and everything in excess has bad consequences. I believe that something that would help us avoid the increase in global warming in changing our food fields, would be to have a balanced diet. Reiterating what I said in the third paragraph, if we reduce our meat consumption by 30% livestock could be ecological and would not damage the ecosystem. If all people focus on balancing the food we eat, we could prevent global warming from continuing to grow.
Leave feedback