‘The global food system is the single largest emitter of greenhouse gases…’
(Michael Barnes, Liberty Headlines) Mankind must immediately go on a diet or the world as we know it will be destroyed—literally.
That’s the takeaway from an outlandish new University of London study that blames meat, agriculture and capitalism for nearly every environmentalist fear under the sun.
The study was recently published in a prestigious British medical journal, and claims the only doomsday solution is to put humanity on a global diet that is essentially vegetarian.
“The global food system is the single largest emitter of greenhouse gases, the biggest driver of biodiversity loss, and the main cause of deadly algae blooms,” researchers said in an interview with the AFP, or Agence France-Presse, an international news agency headquartered in Paris, France.
The mainstream press has described the study as “landmark” research. Study co-author Tim Lang, a professor and policy leader at a British organization providing “sustainability research” for government policy proposals, has declared humanity to be in a “catastrophic situation.”
Co-author Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change Impact Research, said the world “must adopt a healthy diet, slash food waste, and invest in technologies that reduce environmental impacts,” if the Earth is going to survive past 2050.
“It is doable but it will take nothing less than global agricultural revolution,” Rockstrom told AFP.
Not surprisingly, meat is blamed as the main culprit.
Thus, the global diet calls for a reduction in red meat and a doubling of vegetables, fruits and nuts to achieve a universally low-calorie count.
“We are not saying everyone has to eat in the same way,” Lang said. “But broadly—especially in the rich world—it means a reduction of meat and dairy, and a major increase in plant consumption.”
What would that look like? The study calls for 7 to 14 grams of meat consumption per day. For comparison, a modest hamburger patty is 125 to 150 grams—meaning, at most, a hamburger-sized amount of meat could only be eaten once every 11 days.
“For climate, we know that coal is the low-hanging fruit, the dirtiest of fossil fuels,” said Rockstrom. “On the food side, the equivalent is grain-fed beef.”
The study even blasts grains as a source of food, and calls for a “100 percent increase in legumes such as peas and lentils” as a source of protein.
“Grains are considered to be less healthy sources of nutrients,” the study says.
Similar to climate change, the researchers framed their global diet proposal in terms of, “does this come by crisis, or do we start planning for it now?”
And as global elites are already attempting to force a transition from fossil fuels, the study’s researchers are pushing for what they call “the great food transformation.”
Christopher Snowdon of the Institute of Economic Affairs in London is the lone voice of dissent offered in the AFP article. Snowdon, an economist, said the landmark study “reveals the full agenda of nanny-state campaigners.”
But Lang considers such criticisms the work corporate shills, similar to how climate change critiques are blamed on hack-science paid for by oil companies.“We expected these attacks,” said Lang. “But the same food companies pushing back against these findings realize that they may not have a future if they don’t adapt,” he said.