Climate Change and Meat Eating

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]handlebar wrote:
Grain fed beef is the norm because the taste of the meat is largely derived from the fat in it and that taste has made grain fed beef preferential. I wonder if Tanker has ever even taken a bite of grass fed beef. [/quote]

I have, it is basically the only beef I eat. This summer I will be purchasing a small freezer to store a large quantity of grass fed beef raised right in my own town. I know the man that raised the animals, I know how he treated them, and I know i will be purchasing an excellent product.

The taste of grain fed beef has not made it preferential, it’s the price. The taste of grain fed beef is like the taste of shit in comparison to grass fed beef. I highly doubt you have ever had quality grass fed beef, if you did you would have had a meatgasm. [/quote]

You might want to consider that me being several decades older than you might just have predisposed me to doing a lot more things in this life than you have. You picked the wrong guy to engage when it comes to a variety of eating experiences.

I have eaten far more grass fed beef; grain fed beef; forage fed deer, elk, antelope, moose, wild sheep, black bear, bison, domestic and mountain goat, and other stuff I can’t even remember than you probably ever will.

The taste of meat is largely determined by the fat. In wild game it is generally common to trim as much of the fat as possible to remove the gamey taste. With beef the fat is generally desirable (to a degree - a degree that varies with the individual).

I will admit someone can eat a lot of grass fed meat of whatever kind and develop a taste for it and actually prefer it over grain fed beef. It can also work in reverse. Your palate is adaptable.

You are wrong to say, “The taste of grain fed beef has not made it preferential, it’s the price.” The consumer makes the decision. The rancher can breed differently, and has, to accommodate the fat content of the final product. Likewise, the feedlot business can/could adjust its finishing diet to accomplish the same.

If the consumer truly preferred grass fed beef, you’d have feedlots finishing their cattle with grass hay. Corn fields everywhere would be plowed under and planted to grass. The price of beef would then skyrocket as well and many consumers would not be getting the beef they prefer.

Do you honestly think you can speak for an entire nation of people and TELL THEM what kind of beef they will and will not like? Or are you too, “Obama-esque” in that like the coal industry YOU know what’s best for America and YOU think the conventional beef industry should be put out of business?[/quote]

Push, you live in Montana. If you really hadn’t tried grass fed beef than i would assume you were living inside the only Walmart in your state : )

Nope, I’m not “Obamaesque” in that regard, I stated that Americans are confronted with a choice on this very important issue. One way or another, we will eventually have to start depending on smaller farms, but that should come about through eductaion and choice, not force.

You are right to say that palates are adaptable, but grass fed beef really does have a new taste all of its own in my opinion. One of the best taste experiences of my life occurred when I had a grass fed cheeseburger for the first time. i could literally not believe what I had been missing. i was reminded of discovering the tastes of many of the animals you described, wild bear just doesn’t taste like chicken you know?

I

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]GVkid wrote:

[/quote]

Push… that’s what they actually put in the animals feed on many commercial farms… It’s a fact, and it’s disgusting.[/quote]

It’s not a fact. For one thing it is flat out illegal to feed dead cows to cattle. The meat industry is heavily regulated by the USDA and they would never get away with it. Not that it has NEVER happened.[/quote]

facepalm

A commercial farmer in the video i posted blatantly stated ON CAMERA that he puts potato chips and chocolate milk mix in his feed to fatten his cows faster. But your right, lets trust an organization that does not permit a content of more than 50 maggots in a can of tomatoes, or even one that permits farmers to feed cows their own shit.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]GVkid wrote:

[/quote]

Push… that’s what they actually put in the animals feed on many commercial farms… It’s a fact, and it’s disgusting.[/quote]

It’s not a fact. For one thing it is flat out illegal to feed dead cows to cattle. The meat industry is heavily regulated by the USDA and they would never get away with it. Not that it has NEVER happened.[/quote]

facepalm

A commercial farmer in the video i posted blatantly stated ON CAMERA that he puts potato chips and chocolate milk mix in his feed to fatten his cows faster. But your right, lets trust an organization that does not permit a content of more than 50 maggots in a can of tomatoes, or even one that permits farmers to feed cows their own shit. [/quote]

Whoa. I thought he was mixing dead cows by the dump truck load in there too.[/quote]

Sorry, misunderstood. My brain hurts from midterms. But are you ignoring that these animals wallow in their own shit?

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
…One way or another, we will eventually have to start depending on smaller farms…

[/quote]That’s like saying we will eventually have to start depending on the downtown general store and Walmart will have to go out of business.

The economics don’t work.
[/quote]

As you are dealing with a card-carrying member of the Young Communist League USA – or if he is not, he should seriously consider applying – I don’t think the forces he had in mind were market forces, but rather the “have to” that is backed with the barrel of a gun and directed by “socially progressive” leadership that knows better than consumers and producers do.

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
[/quote]

O.K., so what is the product of this thought?

An eminent mind in this field such as yours must have volumes published.

I would like to see them.
[/quote]

I will indulge you. Here’s a segment from a research paper I wrote in high school. [/quote]

Just as I knew would be the case. You haven’t published anything, and you still think that research means quoting sources who present information, regardless of accuracy.

Thank you for the indulgence, but you seem to be about as learned and qualified to speak on this topic as any given random person.

The simple notion that you put a lot of thought into this topic doesn’t mean anything without some sort of product. That you choose to put your own unlearned opinion above people who have actually worked in the industry is ridiculous.

Next time you try to present yourself as an authority on something, you should at least take in to consideration the people who actually produce information from raw data (researchers) and give them the respect and courtesy of not lumping yourself in with them until you actually are one of them.(which you are not)

[/quote]
I gave absolutely no indication that i was an authority in this field, nor would i expect to be given that I just turned 20! Just because i write with an authoritative tone doesn’t necessarily make me an authority, it makes me a compelling writer. Case in point, you actually thought I might have had a PHD when I mentioned nothing of the kind. This is a Politics forum on a lifting website, I enjoy sharing my opinion here because most everyone thinks differently than me. Tell me, what do you think of my argument?

As for “indulging” you with my opinion, I merely assumed your honest intention to hear my say. [/quote]

Don’t flatter yourself with the thought that I mistook you for someone who is educated in any way.

You don’t write with an authoritative tone. You have indicated here in other threads that you have “done a lot of research” on environmental topics.

I called bullshit on your assumptive position of authority.

You proved that correct by providing a high school essay citing CNN.

Where in the hell would you possibly misconstrue that I thought you might have a Ph.D?

As for your argument? I think you need to go feed a couple thousand cows and get back to us, because right now you are sounding ignorant and idealistic.

Don’t just peruse information that confirms your poorly formed beliefs. Go get educated on the reality of it.

Go tell your local grass fed guy that you have an idea to change the world, and you are going to do it on his farm. Explain it to him, and get back to us with his reaction.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
[/quote]

. [/quote]

Don’t flatter yourself with the thought that I mistook you for someone who is educated in any way.

Go tell your local grass fed guy that you have an idea to change the world, and you are going to do it on his farm. Explain it to him, and get back to us with his reaction.

[/quote]

Look man, doing this shit isn’t pleasant, It doesn’t take a man to make e-insults. i’ll be clear with you, I’m a freshman in college who has written around 3 extensive research papers on the effect of the farming industry on health and the environment. My sister works for the Smithsonian Institute on this topic and has personally worked as a manual laborer on a large local farm. She talks to a lot of farmers about the industry and where it’s ultimately headed. I know a lot of what she knows, so I’m probably more educated on this topic than you, but certainly not an expert. Ok?

You think I’m idealistic? My idea for improving the farming industry in this country is for the government to stop subsidizing large farms and for people to slightly reduce their consumption of meat. That would have a tremendous effect. My guess is that if I told a local farmer I wanted to do those things I’d be his best friend.

Your right about one thing though, we’ve talked on this subject before. I believe you said that the thought of the meat industry affecting health and the environment was utter bullshit. I’m here to inform you that you’re kidding yourself.

Perhaps with a Five Year Plan?

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
…My idea for improving the farming industry in this country is…for people to slightly reduce their consumption of meat… [/quote]

You might want to choose a different website to try and advance your cause.

You’re going to “improve” the farming industry by causing a decrease in production, huh?[/quote]

I don’t believe that all of societies improvements are made in economics Push. I believe their are much more important factors to consider.

No, the trill is in discussion. I’d rather discuss topics with people who disagree with me because I learn more than if I discussed the same topics with people exactly like me. It makes my arguments better. I could do without being called a retard or uneducated by a guy in a wife beater, but then again thats mostly how I know I’m having an effect.

However I would be interested to hear a proposed Push policy that might expedite the growth of smaller farms, and decrease the growth of mega farms. hmm?

“Maybe you intend to “go Obama on him” aka “We’re going to put the coal industry out of business?” Slap his sorry ass around via the federal government’s omnipotent stranglehold? Force the consumer to get his much needed Omega 3s from his beef rather than his fish oil supps?”

You are reading me wrong Push, I don’t want the goverment to force anyone to do anything. My argument is not to make any farmer in Sioux Falls change his managment. My argument is that a longer time on grass could compliment not eliminate time on grain period. By the way I work in the cattle industry have for years so I am not completely ingnorant of this subject. The market should and will decide the success/failure of grass fed.

First off, Push you quoted me wrong. "GVkid wrote:

…their may be more calories in the feed they give cows on a grain fed diet, but that’s because they supplement it with potato chips, chocolate milk mix, and other dead cows…"

This was part of a quote where the opener got cut off and didn’t get grayed out. I don’t even know what the hell this “chocolate milk mix” is that they are supposedly feeding cattle.

But back to the discussion - Push what are some of the local farmers feeding cattle around you? I know a couple people in that neck of the woods, one with 3 horses. All she has to do (and supposedly most people in the area), is feed them a couple of flakes of hay a day during the winter, and rotate the pasture in the summer, and they stay fat all year round. Do any of the ranchers/small farmers that are that high up get the same results? I also know that unless you have adequate pasture back here in Michigan, it is pretty much essential that they supplement the cattle’s diet with grain. We had to do that with our own when I was a kid unless we turned them loose on a temporary pasture that we rotated every summer.

How will lowering consumer production of meat help local farmers in ANY way what-so-ever? All you would be doing is shrinking the market, and lower the price of beef. Local farmers cannot compete with commercial ranchers with low prices - their expenses are simply too high. With a small demand and a large supply, you would drive them out of business. My guess is that you would in fact be the opposite of their best friend.

[quote]GVkid wrote:

How will lowering consumer production of meat help local farmers in ANY way what-so-ever? All you would be doing is shrinking the market, and lower the price of beef. Local farmers cannot compete with commercial ranchers with low prices - their expenses are simply too high. With a small demand and a large supply, you would drive them out of business. My guess is that you would in fact be the opposite of their best friend.[/quote]

I mis spoke slightly. What I mean is that we could improve Americas health by reducing our consumption of processed meat, and we could improve the structure of the farming industry by shifting government money thats already being given to large farms and start giving it to smaller ones. Ultimately it would mean that the farming industry would get smaller, but I think given the pressing environmental concerns that it’s a necessary trade.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

Economics has to drive something like this. If the market doesn’t do it then all that’s left is the long arm of the law. I thought you already swore up and down that was anathema to you. Will you confirm?[quote]

You’re a smart kid; you’ll make a good conservative some day when you see the light. You’ll figure this thing out once you’re another decade or so older. I’m serious.[quote]

Why, from a philosophical standpoint, would I want to expedite the growth of inefficiency?[/quote]

I believe their are choices that should be made by our citizens on the market, and that their are other choices that our government needs to make on this issue. Ultimately, people are in control of their own lives and health and should choose whatever product they want. If they don’t want to eat cleaner healthier meat, fine. However, our government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from environmental damage, and to ensure that businesses are conducted ethically. Our government shouldn’t support mega farms for these reasons and should also lay down some basic rules about what the hell you can do to these animals.

Thanks, I’m actually more republican than you might believe. I probably won’t ever call myself a conservative, but who knows in ten years…

And as I said before, too much efficiency can be a curse just like anything else. A balanced market is better than a big market in my opinion.