Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Soooooooo "Roughage Products" which is fiber, that humans also need to eat BTW, is usually something like 25% of pelleted food. The main ingredient in pelleted food is usually digestible by humans and between 6% to 15% protein, it's like 25% to 30% depending on the pelleted food. Pound by pound going by the estimates that "eat cow advocates" use you need 12 pounds of food per pound of beef produced, if half of that is grass and half is balanced (which is about what you get for very fancy "grass fed" meat, because it's rated on % of life in grass at like 75%, but the cow eats way more when it's big), you are using around 1.5 pounds of grain per pound of beef. 12 pounds is the lowest estimate, it can go up to 20 or 22 pounds. Yeah corn and soy are less nutritious, but the reason those get planted industrially is that cows eat it. Other stuff like chickpea, rice, beans, hemp, could be grown instead of subsidized crop for cows and just feed cows grass and forage, which is better for the cows too.

In San Francisco right now there's no "entire life on farm" meat on the market. If I want to eat your "ideal cow" that eats _mostly_ inedible foods I have to buy land and raise it myself or get it alive from a farm. It's not a product one buys for human consumption. Cows in the US eat mostly human edible foods.



"main ingredient in pelleted food is usually digestible by humans"

You would truly need to be starving from famine or an "Instagram Go-Green Promoter" to eat this.


>You would truly need to be starving

That's what the debate is about.


I don't think we had a famine in the last half century that was caused purely by production. The beauty of a working free market is that starving people are willing to pay quite a lot for cheap food, and so it's virtually impossible to starve just by being poor. The problem was always that the food couldn't get to them. I'd bet on a half-half mix of regulatory issues and fighting.

But yeah, production issues can increase price, which will create a whole lot of issues downstream - for example even if people won't literally starve, some of them won't be able to both eat and make rent. Which will predictably piss them off, and this is how you get Arab Spring as a consequence of corn ethanol.


> starving people are willing to pay quite a lot for cheap food, and so it's virtually impossible to starve just by being poor.

I think you're missing out some key facts about poor people.


Like the fact they are poor. .50 dollar a day won't feed your family.


I don't think it's about eating the pellets, but about using the ingredients to make food for people instead of pellets.


> In San Francisco right now there's no "entire life on farm" meat on the market. If I want to eat your "ideal cow" that eats _mostly_ inedible foods I have to buy land and raise it myself or get it alive from a farm. It's not a product one buys for human consumption. Cows in the US eat mostly human edible foods.

Search for "100% grass fed beef". There are many ranches that sell it around the country, even in California. Some deliver, some sell in farmer's markets, and a few products are even available in markets like Sprouts.[1]

The fact that it's not available in most supermarkets could be fixed.

1: https://www.sprouts.com/healthy-living/sprouts-butcher-shop-...


Can it be fixed and meet all the demand for beef today? And without making people poor in the process?

Perhaps the solution is a mix of both: eat less meat and only eat sustainably raise meat.


Grass-fed cows use more land and water than grain-fed cows. So no.


On other hand they can be grown where there is enough land and enough water... Just because parts of the world has lack of water doesn't mean there is lack everywhere. In many parts there is even enough rain.


Are you going to take your bucket out to the Great Plains and capture some of that water?


I can play that game too. Are you going to solve hunger by conjuring more great plains and have the cows graze there?

Because that's the point I'm making. Grass fed beef cannot scale up beyond current production to solve hunger.




Holy shit I need a subscription for the cuts that are worth it? This is peak Bay Area.


Other factors aside, are you claiming that 100% grass fed beef is equivalent to grain finished cattle? I don't have any information to the contrary, and some do take liberties with terminology, but I'd be very interested to learn how this labeling is applied.


how do vegans rationalize owning pet animals?


I am a mere vegetarian but I justify it by aiming for generally better, not perfect.

(Also I adopted my cat about a decade before I became a vegetarian, it doesn't seem morally superior to destroy her because I had a change of heart.)


I see. I eat meat and I know about the issues (health wise and environmentally). I’m trending towards less, largely for health reasons.

My ideal world (in my head) is that human beings don’t interfere with animals at all (to eat, as pets, to showcase). We should interfere in only cases where it’s critical (like a natural disaster treating animals).

Is there a word for this viewpoint?


I live with and care for a dog. We are coevolved species. Your frame of ‘owning’a pet is not shared by all.


If there is a word for it I don't know it, sorry.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: