A public statement signed by more than 1,000 scientists in support of meat production and consumption has numerous links to the livestock industry[.]
The declaration and associated studies are viewed as “propaganda” by leading environmental scientists. Prof Matthew Hayek of New York University in the US said: “The scientific consensus is that we need rapid meat reduction in the regions that can afford that choice.”
Studies in the highest-ranking scientific journals have concluded that cutting meat and dairy consumption in rich countries is the single best way to reduce a person’s impact on the environment and that the climate crisis cannot be beaten without such cuts. People already eat more meat than health guidelines recommend in most developed nations.
The statement has been used to target top EU officials against environmental and health policies and has been endorsed by the EU agriculture commissioner […] The EU was pursuing policies to reduce meat consumption on environmental and health grounds, but some of these have recently been dropped.
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you! /s
Actually, I hadn’t heard of this thing, and if I had this would be my main suspicion. Hmm… what were the arguments in the letter anyway? Oh, literally just “muh tradition” and “muh balanced centrist perspective”, dressed in academic-sounding language.
Thank you for saving me the trouble of making exactly this comment.
I live to serve.
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
It claims “livestock-derived foods are the most readily available source of high-quality proteins” and that “well-managed livestock systems … can generate many other benefits, including carbon sequestration, improved soil health, biodiversity, watershed protection”.
The declaration states that “the highest standards of … evidence underscore that the regular consumption of meat, dairy and eggs, as part of a well-balanced diet, is advantageous for human beings” and that “drastic reductions of livestock numbers could actually incur environmental problems on a large scale”.
Prof Peter Smith of the University of Aberdeen, UK, a lead author on eight reports by the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said: “The Dublin Declaration reads more like livestock industry propaganda than science.
Prof Jennifer Jacquet of the University of Miami, US, said: “The Dublin Declaration is another instance of the livestock industry taking a page out of the fossil fuel playbook to fight action on climate change.
Leroy and Ederer published a letter in the journal Nature Food in June 2023 decrying “hyperbolic arguments” against meat production and consumption and highlighting the Dublin Declaration and Animal Frontiers papers.
A recent response in the same journal by 16 scientists said the letter “contains unsubstantiated generalisations and statements” and “overlooked and downplayed research demonstrating the incompatibility of current and projected levels of consumption of animal products with the imperatives of bringing humanity’s economy within the planetary biophysical limits”.
Saved 89% of original text.
