People can be classified into two categories, meat eaters and non meat eaters. Meat eaters or carnivores are common in society so there has to be a tremendous amount of meat production to meet these needs. But has anyone ever thought about the amount of fuel and energy it takes to make it and how it would ultimately destroy the Earth? Many have and it revealed to them that the cost of being a vegan or vegetarian is far less than continuing their carnivorous ways. Two authors have their opinions to offer, even if they are on the same side of the argument and want to convert people to being a vegan. In “Eating Green” Margaret Lundberg states why becoming a vegan is healthy, not only for the person, but also the environment. John Vidal’s “10 Ways …show more content…
A pathos appeal allows an emotional connection through empathy, while a logos appeal is based on logic. Vidal’s use of the logos appeal will attract logistical people, and will be mostly used in research papers. “If we really want to reduce the human impact on the environment,” Vidal states “the simplest and cheapest thing anyone can do is to eat less meat” (p. 1). His tone throughout the article is apathetic, so readers will only get the information, not knowing what it has to do with their personal life. Having both appeals, like Lundberg demonstrates, is better for readers because it takes the emotional and technical stance. Lundberg describes how the demand for animal protein was incredibly higher than the production. She quoted Marlow’s article stating, “A nonvegetarian diet requires 2.9 times more water, 2.5 times more energy, 13 times more fertilizer, and 1.4 times more pesticide than does a vegetarian diet and the greatest difference comes from beef consumption” (Lundberg 483). She then questions: "Do we really want to wait until it’s too late to change our way of eating?” (Lundberg 485). These two points will make readers subconsciously pause to answer this question themselves, put themselves in the situation imagining the products used and having an immediate reaction to it. This creates a connection that they would want to change and help convince others to also become a …show more content…
Vidal’s article uses a straightforward approach by numbering out each point, while Lundberg wrote a persuasive essay that walks the readers through with each point leading to another. In Vidal’s article, each bullet using the point as their topic; for example, number 1 is “Overheating the planet,” number 2 is “Eating up land,” number 3 is “Drinking too much water,” number 4 is “Causing deforestation,” and so forth. This creates a disconnect between the points and ultimately makes it difficult to present his message. If a reader wanted to know a specific reason why they should be a vegan, then they can pick and choose meaning that they will not look at the other reasons. Lundberg’s style is more reader friendly because the points are thoroughly supported with details and even opinions that she had. Lundberg asks: “With finite resources already being stretched thin by a growing global population, is it rational for us to continue on as we are?” (485). In the quote, readers can hear her contemplative and reflective tone that leaves them questioning that, too. Her essay is easier for the general population to follow along and even tries to involves their
The argumentative article “More Pros than Cons in a Meat-Free Life” authored by Marjorie Lee Garretson was published in the student newspaper of the University of Mississippi in April 2010. In Garretson’s article, she said that a vegetarian lifestyle is the healthy life choice and how many people don’t know how the environment is affected by their eating habits. She argues how the animal factory farms mistreat the animals in an inhumane way in order to be sources of food. Although, she did not really achieve the aim she wants it for this article, she did not do a good job in trying to convince most of the readers to become vegetarian because of her writing style and the lack of information of vegetarian
I will first show the lack of validity and soundness to Howard’s claim that A) a vegan lifestyle is a healthier choice and B) his claim that one must switch to that lifestyle to enjoy these said benefits. To the claim made in A, Howard uses his own health problems he endured on his meat diet, and uses it as a constant variable comparing it to his now relative healthy lifestyle as a vegan. On first glance anyone who eats a calorie-laden, unbalanced diet and ends up weighing 300 pounds, as Lyman himself admitted, will have health problems regardless of his orientation to meat or vegetables. With this said his comparing analogy is inertly flawed and must be disregarded from the argument he presents. On march 8 before the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, Mary K Young, MS.,R.D,NCBA Director of Nutrition Research and Information, presented the benefits of eating meat. Using Data from the 1995 USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSI) she confirms that red meat enhances one overall diet quality. Young goes on to point out that red meat is the number one source for protein, B12, and zinc, number 2 source for B6 and third greatest source for iron, niacin and potassium. She also pointed out that red meat alone has the greatest concentrates of iron and zinc together. Also included cited in Young’s report was the research recently published in the Journal of the American...
.... People do not have to become vegetarians, but people should consider other meat and food as alternatives. Ultimately, if a majority of people chose organic farms and foods it would put a heavy hit on the meat production business. People will be eating healthier, and they will be doing their healthy part in the ecosystem and that will help to lower greenhouse gas emissions and greatly improve treatment of animals. The prices of organic food just need to come down dramatically for people to buy it. Methane from liquid manure, nitrous oxide from manmade fertilizers, carbon dioxide from machines are why people have put themselves and animals into a dilemma and made it into a never-ending continuous cycle.
American consumers think of voting as something to be done in a booth when election season comes around. In fact, voting happens with every swipe of a credit card in a supermarket, and with every drive-through window order. Every bite taken in the United States has repercussions that are socially, politically, economically, and morally based. How food is produced and where it comes from is so much more complicated than the picture of the pastured cow on the packaging seen when placing a vote. So what happens when parents are forced to make a vote for their children each and every meal? This is the dilemma that Jonathan Safran Foer is faced with, and what prompted his novel, Eating Animals. Perhaps one of the core issues explored is the American factory farm. Although it is said that factory farms are the best way to produce a large amount of food at an affordable price, I agree with Foer that government subsidized factory farms use taxpayer dollars to exploit animals to feed citizens meat produced in a way that is unsustainable, unhealthy, immoral, and wasteful. Foer also argues for vegetarianism and decreased meat consumption overall, however based on the facts it seems more logical to take baby steps such as encouraging people to buy locally grown or at least family farmed meat, rather than from the big dogs. This will encourage the government to reevaluate the way meat is produced. People eat animals, but they should do so responsibly for their own benefit.
In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.
As healthy lifestyles have come to take over the minds of the general public, people have begun to pay increased attention to the food they eat, which in turn has sparked a renewal in vegetarianism. Vegetarianism is a term used to describe the practice of living on a diet consisting of nuts, grains, fruits, and vegetables, with or without the use of eggs and dairy products. People usually associate vegetarianism with the hippy movement in the 1960’s; however, it was Frances Moore Lappé's iconic book, Diet for a Small Planet, released in 1971 that launched the vegetarian movement. Since 1971 vegetarian cookbooks, restaurants, and food brands have become popular and have enticed the likings of about 7 million Americans. Unfortunately, despite the growing popularity of vegetarianism most people living on a carnivorous diet laugh at the idea of giving up meat. Although omnivores are reluctant to give up their current diets, giving the vegetarian diet a chance even for just a month or two can bring about a number of positive consequences. By adopting a vegetarian diet a person is not only...
Between watering the crops for farmed animals, providing drinking water for these animals, and cleaning away their waste that is found in factory farms, transportation trucks, and slaughterhouses, the farm-raised animal places an enormous strain on the water supply. Nearly half of all the water used in the United States goes to raising animals for food (Meat Production). According to PETA, one would save more water by not eating a pound of meat than they would by not showering for six months. As seen Fig4. it takes many more thousands of gallons of water to produce meat, while growing the same amount of fruits and vegetables requires significantly less water. An article in the New York Times asserted that “by changing one’s diet to replace 50% of animal products with edible plants like legumes, nuts, and tubers results in a 30% reduction in an individual’s food-related water footprint. Going vegetarian reduces that water footprint by almost 60%” (McWilliams). Armed with this knowledge, one can clearly see that vegetarians save tremendous qu...
There's little doubt that the Earth is in a crisis. The human population is hungrily burning through its resources while simultaneously destroying its ecological balance. While catastrophe seems imminent, there is one small change each person could make in life that would lessen the devestating impact and minimalize our ecological footprint: Veganism.
Every day across America millions of people wake up to start their morning. Throughout the day the vast majority of these people will consume meat, but 3% will replace the pig, cow, and chicken products for vegetable or fruit made meals (Harris). These vegetarians all have many different reasons to make this choice. This decision is a huge change in one’s life and is not without questions. Some people may wonder why would anyone abstain from the amazing food that contains meat. This essay will briefly explain the history of vegetarianism, the reasons for vegetarianism, and answer questions about vegetarianism. Vegetarian diets are all around better than diets containing meat because of three main reasons; the abuse of animals, the environmental damage, and the health benefits for humans.
With the ever-growing population of animal lovers on earth, a more viable, humane solution for food consumption needs to be made, but why make a solution when there has already been one? Meat consumption has been proven time and time again to be unnecessary, but that doesn’t stop the average person from eating a double cheese burger with bacon. Unfortunately, many people are apathetic to what happens to animals in farm factories and continue to support them by buying their products, however, consumers should consider switching to a vegetarian diet because it’s more humane to animals, less farm factories being built can save the planet from deforestation, and with a proper balanced vegetarian diet anyone can maintain a healthy life without the
A United Nations report states that land used for animal agriculture, both for grazing and production of crops fed to livestock, takes up an astounding 30% of land on Earth. ("Meat Production Wastes Natural Resources") To meet the industry’s demands, over 260 million acres of forest in the U.S. have been cleared to grow grain fed to farm animals. ("Meat Production Wastes Natural Resources") With that in mind, the meat industry also dumps disease-causing pathogens through animal waste that pollutes water and forces the need for waste lagoons to be constructed, which are susceptible to leaking and flooding. ("Facts about Pollution from Livestock Farms”) Scientists say that about 14% of the world’s greenhouse gases are released by said agriculture industries, which is a growing concern for climate change and global warming. (Silverman) The meat industry uses one-third of all the fossil fuels consumed in the United States. (Moore) There is no question that farming animals has a negative effect on the environment and steps should be taken to mitigate air and water pollution risks and future deforestation. If animal agriculture was phased out, land used for animal grazing could be returned to forest land and some of it converted into fields for cultivating crops for humans. A global shift toward veganism, resulting in the elimination of the meat and animal agriculture industries, would protect the environment from various detrimental effects.
...ming I will be willing to contribute in any way that I can, and becoming a vegetarian will help the environment a great deal. Becoming a vegetarian can also lead to becoming a healthier person and living a healthy lifestyle. And lastly, the way animals are killed and treated in factory farms are unethical and they should not be treated the way they are just to create a meal for the next person.Consider that the animal you are eating was a vegetarian and the meat contains all the minerals and vitamins of the plant foods it ate when you eat it. Along with fats yourbody needs in substantial amounts to stay healthy.....more on the fats later. Meat is as close to a complete meal as you can get because of this.
Albert Einstein once said, "Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances of survival for life on earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." As people move into a more health conscious society, vegetarianism is becoming a popular choice. While some people cannot imagine a day without meat, others are convinced that a vegetarian lifestyle is the better option. There are numerous benefits of being a vegetarian. Some of the reasons are as follows: vegetarianism has multiple health paybacks, is far better for the environment, and is morally sound. Most people believe that vegetarianism is unhealthy, goes against our natural diet, and unnecessary, however, a vegetarian diet offers many health benefits and is more ethical than an omnivorous existence.
However, many people still refuse to be a vegetarian for different reasons. Some people prefer the taste of meat, and some people believe that they are born to eat meat. Despite that about 2 billion people in the world live basically on the meat diet, around 4 billion people live mainly on a plant-based diet because of food shortage(Pimentel ＆ Pimentel, 2003, pp660S). As everyone knows, the number of population is growing. For example, the total U.S. population doubled in the previous 60 years, and it may double again in the next 70 years (Pimentel ＆ Pimentel, 2003, pp660S). People won’t have enough meat to eat in the future. On the other hand, a well-planned vegetarian diet offers many health benefits. Therefore, people should become vegetarian because it benefits to huma...
Vegetarians tend to be healthier than those who consume meat. This is due to the prevalent unnatural chemicals used in the processing of meats, and eating these are unsuitable for the body. Meats already contain harmful amounts of cholesterol, and over-consumption of red meat can lead to early heart disease. Animals that are raised on farms for their meat are not treated well, and this mistreatment can lead to harm in the meat they are producing. Although one life choice cannot change one’s environmental