UN report says global meat supply has risen fourfold in last 60 years and is expected to keep rising
The average person eats about six times as much chicken and twice as much pork as their grandparents’ generation did, data from a UN report suggests, with global meat supply having risen fourfold in the last 60 years and expected to keep rising.
The supply of poultry rose from below 3kg a person in 1961 to 17kg in 2022, according to data from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Pork supply doubled to 15kg a person over the same period, while beef, the most polluting food, stayed steady at 9kg.
Agriculture is the second most polluting sector of the global economy. Its planet-heating emissions are forecast to rise by 7.6% over the next decade, according to the FAO’s review of the science on the drivers of meat supply and demand, with livestock responsible for an estimated 80% of the increase.
It’s my understanding that it’s cheaper, healthier, and more environmentally friendly than beef, and I’d bet its growth is inversely correlated to beef consumption.
Also it’s the staple protein for people who are trying to be more fit because of how lean parts like the breast can be.
Wait until they figure out about mushrooms, seitan, tofu etc. Nevermind, suddenly it’s not about health and protein anymore.
Taste, convenience and local availability all matter too. In fact there’s a whole massive ecosystem of influences creating the observable change that we are talking about.
There’s also a whole massive ecosystem of changes that haven’t created the change you want here.
Does taste and convenience matter more than cruelty and violence?
This is a conversation about why a broad group of people have certain behaviors, and the observations I made were in regards to the common “why” for that broad group of people.
You’re trying to make the conversation about why those people making those decisions are wrong in your opinion, but that wasn’t what we were talking about. We were talking about “why” they were making their decisions, not “was their decision moral”.
You’re getting downvotes because you’re trying to have a different conversation than was being had, and don’t seem to be understanding that.
This is a narrow take. You can switch from beef to chicken to be healthier. You’re not saying i want to eat the healthiest version regardless of when I enjoy, you’re saying between these two meats I enjoy, chicken is the healthier protein. It’s not a lie that it’s about health just because they’re not following your standards
Chicken is one of the most powerful obesogens in your diet. The chicken that you are eating has almost nothing in common nutritionally with the ones grown in 1961.
Meat is not healthy for anyone and chicken is one of the most concerning meats available for its health consequences. The more meat a human eats in their lifetime, the younger they die and the more major diseases they experience. The top killers of humans this year are all directly caused by or closely related to meat consumption.
“Protein” is not a meaningful nutritional category for the average person. If you are getting enough calories from whole plants, you are automatically getting enough protein. Protein does not have to be supplemented.
It’s also relevant to this discussion that chickens are the most abused animal on the planet. There are almost 27 billion chickens living in atrocity right now. The experiences of animals are real and matter.
I think you’re mistaking me as some kind of crusader who is trying to evangelize chicken or something instead of someone observing what the general perception is relevant to the conversation.
I’m simply correcting your misstatements for the benefit of others. It’s unfortunate if they have somehow upset you; the realities of animal exploitation we avoid thinking about are indeed quite upsetting, and I don’t believe in protecting people from that.