Monday, July 6, 2009

Idiot Letter to Waterbury Republican

Animal production hard on people and the environment

The June 21 article "A powerful lobby behind bovine burps" reveals how little we plan to do in cutting methane emissions from farm animals and in reducing the negative environmental impact of animal food production.

There are three actions we can take:
Tax the farmers, food producers, and consumers for the production and consumption of these environmentally harmful foods.
Trap the methane emitted by cows, a difficult task indeed.
Stop eating these foods to decrease the number of animals needed and in turn decrease the methane emitted.

While the first two option entail us having faith in scientists and the government, the third calls for personal responsibility.
Many nutritionists have shown an animal-free diet is as healthy as or even healthier than an animal-based diet, so the "where would I get by protein, iron and B12?" excuse should be thrown out the window.
Since modern animal food production is often torturous for the sentient creatures we eat (creatures as sentient as the cats and dogs we love and protect), a meat-free diet reduces suffering.
Furthermore, by reducing our consumption of animal products, we will increase the demand for other foods and shift employment to this new production.
Also, we will decrease our dependence on the rainforest-grown grains and U.S. subsidized corn that make up the majority of animal feed.
The message is increasingly clear: Animal production is hard on the environment, our bodies, and most importantly, the animals themselves. The millions of active and healthy vegans in the world provide clear evidence the removal of animals from the human diet is the mature and responsible thing to do.
So what's stopping us? Our appetitive desires? Are we really that weak-willed?

Nick Verrastro Jr.

No comments:

Post a Comment