[extropy-chat] what is the upside / advantage of meat ?

[J. Andrew Rogers]

On Sep 22, 2006, at 1:16 PM, Ensel Sharon wrote:
> But again, meat is expensive to produce and keep - even
> if the 10/1 ratio of feed input to meat output is not exactly  
> right, there
> is still a negative ratio at work ... so why have people,  
> historically,
> wanted it ?  What short term benefits does it provide, and why was it
> worth the cost ?


This argument is theoretical rather than practical, as most meat does  
not compete with plant-based foods for resources in the market.   
There was a discussion on this list a long time ago about this very  
thing.  There are two points that are worth re-bringing up:

- While there may be a 10:1 feed ratio in theory, a very significant  
percentage of the cattle are raised on lands with no other  
agricultural value other than the fact that cattle can thrive there.   
In the US I remember the figure being 40% of the total cattle herd,  
but I could be off by a bit.  No feed is being expended on cattle  
that can feed themselves on otherwise marginally arable land, and in  
fact this use gives the land utility where it would otherwise have  
none.  If we really wanted to, all cattle raising could be done on  
land with no other agricultural value so that this calculus would be  
moot.  The same could be done with pigs, chickens, and many other  
animals, as evidenced by significant feral populations for many of  
these in marginal lands.

- The amount of agricultural land in use is shrinking due to  
improvements in agricultural efficiency.  Even when otherwise useful  
agricultural land is used to feed cattle, it is not taking away from  
some other type of plant-based food production as there are vast  
tracts of arable land that still remain fallow for lack of necessity.

In the broader real-world scene, raising meat is an economically  
productive activity that can significantly expand the total food supply.

J. Andrew Rogers