Eating Green Margaret Lundberg Summary

Analysis of “Eating Green,” By Margaret Lundberg

In the article, “Eating Green,” by Margaret Lundberg, the author states that she believes a vegetarian diet would benefit the health of our bodies as well as the health of our planet. In her thesis, she says, “I believe that our personal and global health is tightly interconnected, and what benefits one will benefit the other” (570). Lundberg’s point in this article is to share her beliefs as to why Americans should become vegetarian. She also explains how pollution, global warming, agriculture and our love for meat is killing our bodies and our future. Lundberg did not provide enough persuasive evidence as to how us becoming vegetarians or vegans would help our planet, she just gives her view

along with some unreliable sources. Although, Lundberg had a few good facts she sounded overwhelmingly preachy and very judgmental towards the average American meat eater.
Lundberg tries to connect with her readers by telling us that her mother felt that a good diet was important for her and her family.

Lundberg’s mother and her healthy ways had influenced Lundberg to start eating green. Her mother believed in having two vegetables with every meal and exercising daily. This healthy ritual led Lundberg to do the same for her family by preparing meals from scratch, because she knew that having good health did not just happen on its own (570). As an adult she took this ritual of health further by becoming vegetarian and later a vegan, saying “I look and feel better at fifty two then I did five years ago. For my health and well-being, becoming a vegetarian was the best thing I could have done.” (571) She ties her personal experience with what she expects everyone else to experience by making the same decision of not eating

meat.
Lundberg sees the destruction of our planet in the production of meat to feed so many of us.

She talks about Americans having a love affair with burgers and fries and how it has its evil side, killing everyone individually with obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and many other illnesses that are caused by our unhealthy way of eating. Lundberg continued to state that eating meat is also having a negative effect on our planet, causing forced agricultural practices to feed our intense cravings for meat, causing pollution, global warming and a threatening dependence of fossil fuels (571). This is partially untrue. “Mortality in Vegetarians and Nonvegetarians: Detailed Findings From a Collaborative Analysis of 5 Prospective Studies,” an article of The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, states “in comparison with regular meat eaters, mortality from ischemic heart disease was 20% lower in occasional meat eaters, 34% lower in people who ate fish but not meat, 34% lower in lacto-ovo-vegetarians, and 26% lower in vegans”. It also stated that there was “no significant differences between vegetarians and nonvegetarians in mortality from cerebrovascular disease, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, or all other causes combined.” (Am J Clin Nutr) Science disproves her theory that eating meat will kill you and being vegetarian will save you. She states that the production of livestock in our country is affecting the health both of our

livestock and of our planet. She expresses concern about the major problems we are experiencing from climate change caused by the greenhouse effect.
Lundberg states that pollution from greenhouse gases and the dwindling supply of fossil fuels, are damaging our planet. She adds that if we adopt a vegetarian diet as a community we can reduce and terminate the ills of our planet and can be, “what the doctor ordered” (571). Lundberg precedes to quote dietician Kate Geagan, comparing the environmental impact of the American diet with “our love affair with SUV’s,” warning that the energy use involved in the “production, transport, processing, packaging, storing, and preparation (of food) is now the single largest contributor to global warming” (571). Lundberg points out that the production of livestock has now become further away from the era of the “American Cowboy.” It has caused cattle grazing to decrease in favor of manufactured feeding. Lundberg reiterates what Michael Pollan says about raising cattle and other livestock becoming a multibillion dollar operation that is a lot more manufacturing then ranching was originally, and that cows wandering fields until they are ready to be slaughtered is over. She points out that cows were originally meant to eat grass but that now they are unnaturally fattened with corn and slaughtered faster than they were before.
Lundberg states that corporations are attempting to “do their part” for our environment. She mentions the dairy farmers in New York teaming with General Electric to produce renewable energy from cow manure, and how they could accumulate electricity for 200 homes from the manure of 2,500 cows. Lundberg quotes Rick Naczi saying, “We’ve estimated that this could generate $38 million in new revenue for dairy farmers around the country and offset 2 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalents annually by 2020,” (573) but does not give enough evidence to support a conceivable plan of action. She doesn’t say anything about any planned projects or government sanctions to support this move to alternative energy sources, because there aren’t any. Everything is still in the research stage to produce this renewable energy and help reduce wastes methane emissions.
Lundberg concludes with a last plea to become a country of vegetarians, telling us it is the only way we will have enough food to survive. She says, “if greenhouse gasses continue to build as they have over the last fifty years, the effects on today’s farmlands may be irreversible.”(573) She also mentions, “As global temperatures continue to rise, Alaska may become the new “Corn Belt” and the Midwest could become a desert,”(574) supporting many scientist’s current beliefs of what global warming will ultimately do. However, Lundberg was most judgmental when she stated, “A vegetarian diet would enable us to healthfully feed many more people, and make much better use of the resources we have,” (574) and then went on to end her article with “Do we really want to wait until it’s too late to change our way of eating?” (574) Her way of telling the readers that eating meat is dangerous for our planet could have been approached in a different way that played less on the emotions of the readers and more on scientific facts and problem solving.