Why You Will Eat Less in the Future

[Lambo]

With food and fuel costs soaring and the financial costs of global warming becoming reality, a new cure-all prescription has emerged: The average American should eat less.

And with a new University of Illinois report forecasting even higher food prices next year, the suggestion could become an inevitable way of life for people on tight budgets. It would of course have the added benefit of trimming waistlines and improving health, which would provide additional savings in reduced health care costs.

And cutting back would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, scientists point out, helping reduce the billion-dollar price tags put on damage and woe predicted to come with a warming world.

Fat and unhappy

Roughly 19 percent of U.S. energy consumption goes toward producing and supplying food, David Pimentel and his colleagues at Cornell University write in the current issue of the journal Human Ecology. Considering that the average American consumes an estimated 3,747 calories a day, — at least 1,200 more than health experts advise — the researchers suggest everyone cut back.

Animal products and junk food, in particular, use more energy and other resources for their production than staples such as potatoes, rice, fruits and vegetables.

Producing all the stuff that goes into a single hamburger, for example, requires some 1,300 gallons of water, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. A study in 2006 by University of Chicago researchers Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin found that a vegetarian diet is the most energy-efficient, followed by one that includes poultry. Diets with red meat or fish are the least efficient.

"By just reducing junk food intake and converting to diets lower in meat, the average American could have a massive impact on fuel consumption as well as improving his or her health," Pimentel and his team write in a statement released today.

The idea is not brand new. As LiveScience's Bad Science columnist Benjamin Radford put it earlier this year: "If you really want to help save the Earth, you can start by dropping a few pounds."

You may have to cut back

Meanwhile, prices at the grocery store could force changes in consumption.

Soaring energy prices will yield sharp increases for corn and soybean production next year, according a separate study announced today. Fertilizer prices are expected to surge 82 percent for corn and 117 percent for soybeans, said Gary Schnitkey, an agricultural economist at University of Illinois.

"Roughly 80 percent of the cost of producing nitrogen fertilizer is natural gas, so as natural gas costs have gone up so have the costs of those inputs," he said.

Rising fuel prices also mean it costs more to harvest and transport food.

While farmers will likely absorb some of the added costs, Schnitkey says consumers also should expect to pay more for products ranging from cereals and syrups to grain-fed beef.

"There's not going to be a reduction back to lower food costs as long as we have these higher production costs," Schnitkey said. "Energy prices are driving a lot of what's going on and ultimately that hits the consumer."

Additional savings

If people ate less, and therefore fossil fuel consumption declined, other savings could ensue.

For instance, a third study coincidentally also out today finds that global warming, fueled by greenhouse gases emitted by the burning of fossil fuels, is costing money in the United States and that situation will grow worse. The scientists argue that costs will be in the billions for each of the eight states included in the study: Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey and Ohio. California and other well-studied states were not included.

The losses will be due in part to water resource issues, coastal flooding, health effects and reduced tourism.

"We don't have a crystal ball and can't predict specific bottom lines, but the trend is very clear for these eight states and the nation as a whole: Climate change will cost billions in the long run and the bottom line will be red," said Matthias Ruth, who coordinated the research and directs the Center for Integrative Environmental Research at the University of Maryland. "Inaction or delayed action will make the ink run redder."

The study was funded by the Environmental Defense Fund.

You're in control

The Cornell study led by Pimentel argues that the consumer is in the strongest position to contribute to a reduction in energy use.

"As individuals embrace a 'greener' lifestyle, an awareness of the influence their food choices have on energy resources might be added encouragement for them to buy good, local produce and avoid highly processed, heavily packaged and nutritionally inferior food," the scientists write. "As well as leading to a cleaner environment, this would also lead to better health."

Scientists say cutting calories is one of the sure-fire ways to extend the human life span. It might also improve your sex life: Scientists found last year that obesity is linked to erectile dysfunction.


Why You Will Eat Less in the Future | LiveScience

[Aletheides]

But that sucks for the 50,000 children that die per day of starvation already. I would expect these numbers to get higher.

[byzantium]

Unfortunately, humans are meant to eat meat. All the preaching about the virtues of veganism won't change that. The good news is that bovine meat is poorly tolerated by many Americans, as is wheat. Dairy is also bad news-typically anything that comes from a cow is to be avoided, due to allergic reactions. This may be the origin of the sacred cow of India-Indians in the very distant past must have interpreted the illnesses associated with cow products as the vengeance of cow gods, therefore abstinence was required in order to placate said gods. Pork is another unhealthy meat that turns up again and again in meat bans around the world.

Bird and fish meats are generally the best. It just so happens that cows and pigs require vastly more resources to feed than birds and fish. The problem with fish is overfishing, not the energy consumption of the fish themselves. Fish farms like those in Chile typically go overboard and produce lots of waste in concentrated areas. Generally, anything that has gluten in it, including wheat, rye, and barley, is bad for you. American corn (maize) and egg are better.

The American lifestyle in particular consumes way too much water-American suburban lawns consume tons of water, and it is generally illegal to let your lawn die. A Sacramento environmentalist decided to let her lawn die after the governor announced that the state was facing its worst drought in 30 years. She quickly found herself facing an $800 fine for violating the city's health code. The city only backed down after the story made the front page of the newspaper and public outrage poured into city hall.

It is also illegal generally to plant produce on your lawn-the "living lawn" movement, which advocates ripping up turf and replacing it with produce, has run into a brick wall of municipal code inspectors who refuse to let people do it. Obviously some antiquated laws need to be changed. "Urban farmers" in Detroit who have homesteaded miles of empty lots created by decades of blight routinely find their crops ripped up by the city. Hay growers find that Detroit Public Works has decided that their crop is "ghetto grass" and taken it upon itself to get rid of it in the dead of night. The law may be an idiot, but in the face of famine, we need smarter humans to override it.

[allysa]

I sometimes eat heavy but I do exercise always, and its ok. If it brings good in the environment, why not?

[tazman9r]

Exercising is bad. If you breathe to heavily, you'll increase carbon dioxide output, a greenhouse gas. If the world walked to work all at the same time, much of the oxygen would be used up and the world would experience a large introduction of greenhouse gases it would never recover from. Walking increases body heat, which transfers to the atmosphere, increasing global temperatures. Many experience better GI tract movement when walking, which would introduce massive amounts of methane to the atmosphere, worsening the problem.

If we refuse to eat meat, cows would soon outnumber humans, their deadly methane emissions choking the atmosphere and increasing temperatures globally. Therefore we must eat meat and remain sedate in our lifestyle, to save the planet.

We need to use vegetables as fuel for our cars so we can't walk to work. We need to use other staples, like sugar, for other types of fuel to achieve this purpose. Saving the planet is all important, or we'll have no place to live.

So join with me. Eat meat, drive to work, don't exercise, SAVE THE PLANET.