The Role Meat Plays in Obesity and our Carbon Footprint

In the U.S. today, society faces two massive problems that we cannot seem to solve: Obesity and Reducing our carbon footprint. People around the country have many different opinions on how to conquer each of these problems, but many of them do not realize that these problems are actually connected. There have been multiple studies that show that what we eat is not only correlated with obesity, but with our carbon footprint as well. One ingredient that seems to have a significant impact on both of these problems is something that we in the U.S. seem to base much of our diet on… meat! All this information seems to raise one question though; If a diet less concentrated on meat can help reduce obesity and our carbon footprint, should the government put regulations on the quantity of meat produced in the U.S. when we know that our resources could be better used for a better purpose? Creating government regulations on the quantity of meat produced will reduce the obesity level in the U.S. as well as its carbon footprint, while at the same time enabling us to use our natural resources for more “green” purposes and humanitarian efforts.

As mentioned by the Public Health Organization, we are facing an “American obesity epidemic.” A simple answer as to why we are facing this problem is that we eat too much food and we don’t exercise enough. Even though this is true and is definitely a contributor to our obesity rate, it is important to note some other substantial changes in the diet of America as a whole. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that currently each American eats about 195lbs of meat a year compared to 138lbs in the 1950’s. This surge in meat consumption has led Americans to eat 20% more calories in the year 2000 than they did in 1983. Furthermore, the amount of fast food consumed has also increased exponentially due to its cheap prices and easy accessibility. Much of the fast food we consume contains meat and we now know that 11% of the average Americans diet is comprised of fast food.

A study was conducted and published in the International Journal of Obesity in 2009 that wanted to analyze the associations between meat consumption and obesity using body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference. Meat is generally high in energy and fat content, which is why it could be associated with a higher risk of obesity. The data examined in the study was a national representation from 1999-2004 by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The findings of this study found that there is a positive association between meat consumption, BMI, and waist circumference. People with a high meat consumption were 27% more likely to be obese compared to those who have a low meat consumption. Those considered to have a high meat consumption consumed 700 calories more of meat a day than those that had a low meat consumption.

Since our consumption of meat has increased significantly and we know there is a positive correlation between the amount of meat consumed and obesity, it would also make sense that there is an increase in the number of people that have diabetes. It is a well known fact that people who are obese have a significantly higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes. According to the journal article, “Meat Consumption Linked to Diabetes,” people who have less meat in their diet have a lower risk of developing type 2 diabetes and vice versa. More specifically, incidents of diabetes were four times higher among those who consume meat in their diet than vegans. Former New York Times writer, David Zinczenko, published an article that claims before 1994 only about 5% of diabetes cases in children were obesity-related. In 2002, that number increased to 30%, resulting in an estimated $100 billion in diabetes health care costs compared to the $2.6 billion that was spent in 1969. As one could probably tell, the overall consumption of meat in the U.S. has created a domino effect of problems. It is obvious that such a high consumption of meat in our diets negatively affects our bodies, but let's start to examine how its affecting our environment as well.

Steve Boyan, a former political science professor at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, says that an estimated 3000-5000 gallons of water is used for every pound of beef we produce. To put this in perspective the average household in the U.S. uses a little over 4,100 gallons of water per month. This means that the average number of gallons used to produce one pound of beef (4000) is almost equivalent to the amount of water a household will use in a month. Instead of producing beef at such a mass quantity, we could use the water that would be saved for humanitarian efforts, like giving clean water to people around the world who do not generally have access to it. This example is just beginning to scratch the surface of how meat production affects our carbon footprint.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

The 2009 EarthSave article, “City Says Eat Less Meat To Cool Planet,” draws on information gathered from global organizations that show how the production of meat affects global warming. According to the UN’s Food and Agricultural Association, the production of animals for food is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gasses, while all the planet’s car, trucks, planes, and trains are only responsible for 13%. The production of meat has been proven to produce nine times more greenhouse gas emissions than plant based equivalents. More specifically, beef can cause 10-20 times more of an environmental impact due to the heavy amount of energy, water, and pesticides used in its production. This means that if we cut down on the quantity of meat produced, especially beef, we would be able significantly decrease our greenhouse gas emissions, the primary contributor to global warming.

As previously mentioned, the amount of meat in the average American’s diet has increased from previous years. With this being said we also know that the excessive consumption of meat can result in a high intake of fat, which can lead to obesity as an outcome. This has led to many recommendations to limit meat in your diet, especially meat that has been processed. The city of Cincinnati is actually the first city in the U.S. to recommend eating less meat as a measure of trying to combat global warming. The goal of this recommendation was to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the production of meat by by 40% in the next 20 years and by 84% by 2050.

Besides the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, a diet less concentrated on meat would also help to avoid pollution in our rivers and streams and reduce the destruction of our forests and topsoil. Animals excrete 130 times more waste than humans do and do not have a sewage treatment system, the waste ends up contaminating our air and polluting rivers and streams. Additionally, about 70% of agricultural land is used for livestock farming, which can lead to overgrazing. Overgrazing is when plants are not given sufficient periods of time to recover after long periods of grazing. This can result in soil erosion as well as deforestation; Not only are we not cutting down our greenhouse gas emissions, but we are destroying trees and plants, the very things that reduce our emissions in the first place.

Farm animals are also fed a mixture of growth hormones and chemicals. The hormones are used in an effort to increase their growth and productivity, which in turn will increase their value, and the chemicals are used in effort to keep them alive in harsh conditions that they would otherwise not survive in. When these animals are eventually slaughtered and sold to the public, their meat still contains these hormones and chemicals, which have been proven to cause cancer and other diseases in humans.

Contrary to the many studies that say a high consumption of meat leads to obesity, there are some studies that suggest the exact opposite. According to a study in the Journal of Obesity & Metabolic Syndrome, the percentage of people considered to be overweight or obese was higher when there was no meat consumption than those who consumed meat on a daily basis. Among 1,857 school-aged children and adolscents, only 386 of them were considered to be overweight or obese. About 23% of the 386 subjects consumed no meat, while 18% consumed meat on a daily basis. This study does not directly show a cause and effect relationship of meat consumption and obesity, but it does prove a negative correlation. There are many rationales that can explain this correlation, but one that the study describes is the increased consumption of unhealthy fast food. Meat provides a lot of energy and fat that our bodies need, so after eating meat people are generally satisfied with their meal and do not feel the need to eat more food. Those who did not eat meat with their meal sometimes feel unsatisfied and start to eat fast food and milkshakes with high amounts of fat and sugar in order to satisfy themselves. This can explain the higher obesity rate in the study among subjects who did not eat meat than in those who did eat meat.

Additionally, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), claims that in order to lose weight and decrease the population of people who are considered to be obese, we have to reduce the overall number of calories consumed on a daily based. This means that even though some research shows that a more plant-based diet is linked with lower levels of obesity, it is just a small part of the overall people’s overall diet that needs to change if the obesity rate was to decrease. By only reducing your meat consumption it may make it slightly easier to lose weight, but you still need to reduce the amount of sugars and fats you are consuming. Cutting down on meat consumption alone is not a solution to the obesity problem we face if we are not able to adjust our diet in other ways as well.