SkinnyPupp | 11-21-2009 07:33 PM | Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon HG
(Post 6691243)
Why the fail SkinnyPupp?
As far as I know, that statement is true isn't it? I mean we have to produce extra grains for the animals to eat, and we alone could get way more calories off the grains versus feeding it to the animal and eating the animal meat.
Not saying that a meatless/grain diet is the ideal diet, but just curious. | It depends on what you mean by "cost". If you mean monetary cost, who really cares? If you mean "cost" to the tax payer, then nothing is as expensive as corn in the US. There are documentaries about that. Or you could look at it from the health care standpoint, and see how heart disease and diabetes are becoming such problems - something that only started happeneing when we began eating less fat and more grains in our diet. So that is pretty "expensive"
If you mean "cost" to the environment, then nothing humans do is more "expensive" than farming grains.
Like I said before, if the PETA nutjobs really had their way, and every single person on this planet started eating nothing but organic non-animal products, we would literally have to replace all wildlife with fields of crops. So much for animal rights! Not to mention we'd be sicker and fatter than ever, which would be even more "expensive".
So in no way does meat "cost more to produce" than grains. |