Video on EAT-Lancet 2.0 study and diet

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Hearth Supporter
Jan 27, 2008
5,817
SE PA
Getting slow around here... thought some might find this video interesting.

Basically, if you think that we don't understand what the best diet for humans and the planet looks like, its because of misinformation.

The longish video:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


The interviewer Chris is a vegan, but the video concerns the (non-vegan) science-driven EAT-Lancet diet report(s), and the massive misinformation campaign rolled out to discredit it.

An article about the report: https://www.stockholmresilience.org...on-the-planet-and-save-millions-of-lives.html

The paper: https://www.donorplatform.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/PIIS0140673625012012.pdf

Article about the misinfo campaign: https://changingmarkets.org/report/...-of-an-industry-orchestrated-online-backlash/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: begreen
What is my point? The climate is a problem.

Its a short term problem (which is how do we change our lives) coupled to a long term problem (CO2 stays in the air for >500 years, and gives a worse climate).

People and animals can adjust. So the damage (and cost/year) cares about the RATE of change, that is the rate of warming.

Long term, we have all the tech to decarbonize or to do so enough that the long term (after 2100) will have options.

But the warming and disruption and costs are very high RIGHT NOW and for the next couple decades.

And what is the easiest thing we can do about that: METHANE. We can reduce methane emissions, and take a big chunk of the warming for the next couple decades off the table. And half of that is fossil methane leaks (which can be solved at modest cost). And the other half is Ag. Mostly animal Ag, and mostly Beef at that.

And so the lowest cost solution to intermediate time (our lifetimes) climate issues runs right into the BEEF lobby.
 
Pasture raised animals cycle carbon, even sequester a modest amount. How we raise beef is the problem. Get rid of the corn subsidies, convert that land to managed pasture (has to be managed well), and focus on a grass system. Grass fed ruminants are some of the healthiest, lowest input food sources around.
 
I agree that how we raise beef is a problem. Here.
(I remember when I was a kid in Europe, the cows of the neighbors would always go to the field, and in winter would eat hay. Corn fed cows are not a thing there. At least back then.)

So "greens fed" is good. But grass is too monoculture (and hence cow pies; they have diarrhea continuously - wild ruminants don't!). Animals need variety. Grass+other field greens.
We had another neighbor who kept some cows in a mixed forest/field area. Almost no grass but other greens. The turds were - turds. Not pies.

But calling fauna efficient (low input) food sources is not correct, as compared to food from flora.
Flora doesn't use energy to keep itself warm, doesn't excrete nearly as much substances (mostly water and O2, and some volatiles), and therefore their inputs are far lower for the weight of product.
 
I agree that how we raise beef is a problem. Here.
(I remember when I was a kid in Europe, the cows of the neighbors would always go to the field, and in winter would eat hay. Corn fed cows are not a thing there. At least back then.)

So "greens fed" is good. But grass is too monoculture (and hence cow pies; they have diarrhea continuously - wild ruminants don't!). Animals need variety. Grass+other field greens.
We had another neighbor who kept some cows in a mixed forest/field area. Almost no grass but other greens. The turds were - turds. Not pies.

But calling fauna efficient (low input) food sources is not correct, as compared to food from flora.
Flora doesn't use energy to keep itself warm, doesn't excrete nearly as much substances (mostly water and O2, and some volatiles), and therefore their inputs are far lower for the weight of product.
Agreed diverse pastures make the best meat. My lambs eat grass, clovers, forbes, and anything else I put in front of them.

My statement on low input is based on how we can generate a significant amount of food in these pasture based systems without the need for million dollar tractors, significantly less or no synthetic fertilizers (cancer rates in Iowa are worth looking at), and fossil fuels.

I currently run a flock of 100 sheep with my two legs, some solar powered fencing, and ATV and some good dogs. If I could secure the land to run 1000 I still wouldn't need much more than that. But unfortunately a lot of the ground around me goes to the row crop guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stoveliker