[jamesgagan]

I know there will be comments saying that individual action is not enough to combat climate change, or that it's too late for that, but when governments are so slow to act and corporations will only change when their bottom line is at stake, it is left to individuals to take action. Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

[jniedrauer]

Personally I think that individual action is largely futile. I've also stopped eating meat. I want to be able to look gen Z in the eye when I'm old and say I did everything I could.

[tonyedgecombe]

I want to be able to look gen Z in the eye when I'm old and say I did everything I could.

Then it won't have been futile.

[JoeAltmaier]

Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

[jamesgagan]

I feel like this attitude is popular because it gives people an excuse to not change their lifestyle.

[username223]

> Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

We're pretty much screwed (but not extinct) at this point no matter what, but going vegan doesn't matter nearly as much as living in a smaller house (i.e. less concrete), or driving and flying less.

I mostly avoid beef and dairy, which are the main diet-based causes of global warming, but beyond that it's a rounding error.

[malvosenior]

> Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

I'm sorry but no. Your diet is a personal choice and no amount of shaming is going to change that.

Do you travel internationally? Own a car? Do any other of a million things that have an impact on the climate but also constitute living your life?

It's great to put this information out there but telling people that your choices are "simply the right thing to do at this point" is incredibly condescending and will likely have the opposite impact you want it to have since no one likes to be preached at.

[Falling3]

> Your diet is a personal choice and no amount of shaming is going to change that.

I guess that depends on how you define personal choice. Climate change has certain changed the calculus, but diet was never merely a personal choice when it required the death of other individuals.

As for the shaming, I'm not in favor of that because it does not seem to be an effective way of bringing about change. But simply having these kinds of discussions cannot fairly be called shaming. That's a cop-out to avoid meaningful discourse.

[artimaeis]

Isn't there a level of condescension and or proselytizing that always goes on around environmental conversations?

Reduce, reuse, recycle - if you do it, good! If you don't, bad! Travel less, don't own anything.

How can we frame these sorts of ideals so that people don't feel attacked?

There _is_ a climate crisis. At least some level of that crisis is driven by consumer demands. We should be able to advocate a change without people feeling like they're being shamed.

[jamesgagan]

I have been actively trying to reduce my ecological footprint because I believe climate change is real. I don't feel it's a matter of "personal choice" at this point. The way we live has a profound impact on the planet, and we all need to try and reduce that impact in any way we can. I realize this is a message people don't want to hear, but I believe they need to hear it. Going vegan and flying less are two of the biggest changes an individual can make.

[alex_duf]

I can see why being "preached at" is being annoying, but the fact have been here long enough, yet a large percentage of the population haven't tried to change their diet.

If public shaming and social clout isn't involved, no one will.

[perfunctory]

> Your diet is a personal choice

Not any more

> and no amount of shaming is going to change that.

It did change it for me. I haven’t gone vegan all the way but I did change my diet

> Do you travel internationally?

Less and less and preferably by train

> Own a car?

Yes, and I stopped driving it.

> since no one likes to be preached at.

I must be an exception then.

[astazangasta]

Yes, it sucks to be told you are a sinner. What language would you suggest people use in order to encourage people to be vegan? Suggesting it is the moral choice seems like a good method to me. Then again i am inclined to seek the moral and respond to guilt.

You seem more concerned about not being condescended to; for such an individual, what language would you find cogent?

[leekyle333]

Or maybe you should just eat properly grazed live stock, might be a lot better than going vegan. https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_worl...

[jamesgagan]

This is discussed in the article: "Some scientists have suggested that grass-finished beef, if managed properly, can be a more sustainable option: As the cattle graze, they stimulate grass to grow deep roots and pull more carbon into the soil, helping to offset the cows’ climate impact. But, on the flip side, grass-finished cattle also take longer to reach slaughter weight, which means they spend more time burping up methane into the atmosphere. Because of this, some studies have suggested that grass-fed beef can actually be worse for the climate over all, though the debate about this continues to rage.

For now, it’s hard to say with confidence that grass-fed beef is consistently more climate-friendly than conventional beef."

[vibrato]

Destroy your health for virtue points trying to tackle the smallest contributor to global warming, sounds right to me /s

[artimaeis]

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emis...

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...

It's not the largest contributor, for sure. But it's sizable.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-06466-8

Reducing meat intake _does_ sizably reduce overall emissions.

Honestly the links between diet and health are always thin at best, but I don't know of any that strongly link a well-balanced vegan diet with reduced health. Usually, the opposite.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952

> "In general, vegetarians typically enjoy a lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), obesity, type 2 diabetes, and some cancers [...]"

[jamesgagan]

All the evidence seems to indicate that the less meat and dairy one eats, the healthier they are. I also used to believe vegans were unhealty until I did some research. As a personal anecdote, I've been vegan for about 4 years now and my health is better than ever.

[astazangasta]

Did you read the article? Livestock is in fact a major contributor to global warming, about 14%, which puts it on par with all of transportation.

[dalore]

Giving up our growing space to grow lots of monocultured vegetables will be worse for the climate.

The co2 emissions from cows aren't the problem. Factory farming yes is a problem, but if cows are put on grass that grass is a co2 sink and gives off far less.

If you grow an acre of soy it's just as bad as it isn't sustainable.

Also the fact that being vegan has serious health consequences and animals provide far more nutrition.

The answer isn't going vegan at all but to have sustainable farming practices where animals and plants are grown together in a regenerative process.

Grass is one of the best crops to grow. It's a great carbon sink, and takes away methane. Builds its own fertility so no need for artificial fertilizers. No management, machines, pesticides etc. Grows everywhere. We just can't eat it. But ruminants (like cows/sheep/etc) can. They have a digestive system for it. They turn grass into meat and milk. Meat and milk that don't need storage until you need to harvest it. It also tastes better.

We used to have far loads more bison roaming the earth. But they didn't cause climate change because they ate grass. When you factor in the grass it's a net positive and not a negative like the article claims.

These studies like to look at things in a bubble, but the problem is far more complex than that.

Converting pasture to arable land to grow more plant based food will make the climate situation worse. You will reduce these carbon/methane sinks. You will need to fertilize and harvest the soil. Fetalization itself reduces the carbon/methane sink capabilities.

Eating beef can actually be a very sustainable option. In many cases, pasture-reared beef actually shows a carbon-equivalent net gain when carbon sequestration is taken into account.

Edit: Perhaps a comment or 2 would be nice on why people don't agree or why I might be wrong. Happy to read up and learn

[hkyeti]

This is disproven by Oxford scientists. Grass fed beef is worse for climate change than CAFO beef. Look it up