Help me out here: From a PLANET EARTH PERSPECTIVE ONLY, temporarily downplaying or deprioritizing human health, and realizing that MOST of the 7.2+ billion humans living today are NOT making food choices for the betterment of the planet, nor out of anxiety about harming the Earth and the biosystem, nor in order to protect nonhuman persons who are AT RISK of exploitation as food animals: WHICH of the currently plant-based diets is optimal for the EARTHs harm reduction - short-term, medium-range, and long-term? Now, dont merely LIKE the question; dont merely QUIP (sending me up some sound bites); dont merely tell me that YOU want to go for the whole enchilada and somethiing else - yes, we care about human life - all of them, but lets help me get the clear ECOLOGICAL case - on behalf of the planet: Which plant-based diet - is it one which EMPHASIZES the STARCHY root vegetables, often used as traditional foods in South and Central America (because theyre more readily available, familiar to traditional populations and migrating peoples who diffuse into other regions, where it would tax the supply chain less, use less energy, and be more readily followed? Or is it a more raw foods approach, using avocados and high-nutrient leafy green vegetables, since they require less food to ENSURE that the human population has the nutrients it needs (since theyre likely to go for fun foods at some point, and its easier to ensure nutritional adequacy? Which of these strategies uses the least energy for social and cultural compliance, and which is going to sustain human life with the least disease (and injury) since remediating illness and disease costs the ecosystem in terms of the ecological impact (unintended consequences) of the medical-industrial complexs post-diagnosis interventions in the chronic conditions which result from suboptimal eating and living more generally? In terms of the planet alone, what is evidence-based regarding human diet? The questions of availability and agricultural sustainability would need to be deeply, thoroughly, and exhaustively studied, and I suspect that the data is only superficial (covering only some issues, such as climate disruption and run-off from various kinds of agriculture). But that may not be what the IPCC says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas Of course, (from ROME, mind you) theres FAO (2006). Livestock’s Long Shadow–Environmental Issues and Options. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). IF we are deprioritizing HUMAN HEALTH here, which of the evidence-based vegan diets which we COULD promote for human health (because evidence supports them) could we promote if our conscience is BIG enough to care about the planet and FUTURE GENERATIONS who MUST live on THIS planet? Is it: Starch-based (mostly macronutrients?), depending on root vegetables (get those vegetables OUT there to people). Nutrient-dense (micronutrients) PETA-supported celebrity diets and junk foods (e.g. all the vegan candies for Halloween) some religious-compliant diet something else
Posted on: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 00:40:51 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015