I am the only one to say this text is complete bullshit?!
In US for example 70% of cows live in factory farms. They're being fed with food coming from monocultures that destroy biodiversity.
But yeah, nice words being just words.
Discussion
Better being the only one than being in the herd I guess
The biggest problem is that most food is grown poorly in general and then over processed. The next biggest problem is that people are not eating locally or seasonally. I like to eat everything that is edible growing on my homestead. That includes foraged plants, nuts, berries and wild game as well as cultivated plants/animals. While I try to preserve what yields I can get from the homestead, most of the time my diet it dictated by what's growing in abundance throughout the seasons.
Having a diverse diet means access to a diversity of food and food preparation/preservation. Which is more resilient too. The perfect diet, in my situation is to eat what I can grow and what is growing in my back yard.
Yes my friend. Perfect.
If the text above mentioned that would have been OK. But it's bs.
Just one more thing: not everyone can eat locally because most people are poor and even if everyone was rich... good bio food is one-expensive, two-insufficient.
There is not enough good land on Earth for all people to eat good food. Good food is for growers and people with money. Poor people eat bad food from supermarkets.
And almost everyone is poor.
Saif sounds like one speaking from the 1% World, where they think all cows roam free in the Alps.
Not mentioning the "meat only" cause enviroment bs
This is incorrect. There yes more land that can be grazed by various edible animals than can be practically farmed. And, as the animals graze, they can help increase arable land. It's a positive feedback cycle if done with some thought and an occasional push in the right direction.
I'm not trying to be mean but have a look again at the world map, see how much water, desert, forests, mountains and agricultural land there is.
We can cut all the forests but that's not a solution, in Amazon is not going great.
All the agricultural land in the world belongs to someone. If they're not all growing happy cows probably there's a reason for that.
I have, a little. And not every piece of land can support cows. But goats and sheep? Delicious, useful, and transformative. Yes, Bill Gates is buying a crapton of farmland in the US to push production to his cancer foods. Yes, the Amazon is under pressure. But, if you can get outside of the cities, you can probably live a much better, healthier life than you could otherwise. No, not everyone can do that, but, it's a goal and more people can reach it than they might realize.
I get you, sounds wonderful, but we are 8 billion. We can hardly feed people on 3rd world like it is now. Billions have almost nothing to eat. And we can't go and addopt communism or killing billions.
There's not enough land available for everyone to eat happy cows. Most people will only eat sad cows for 100 years. Then lab meat.
We currently produce too much food. The issue is geopolitical nonsense getting in the way of distribution. (We can agree that Fiat is the cause of most of that, yes?) even at 10 billion (the approximate global maximum based on population tendencies and projections I've seen, +/- half a billion), we can produce enough decent food for people to not starve on the land we already use for farming, though, I propose we move to a decentralized, distributed food system, which will prove more robust, diverse, flexible and healthier than industrial monocropping which is poisoning the earth, the air, the water, and us.
No you’re not, I agree with you, saif is just lying through his teeth to support his thesis.