Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Falsificationism's avatar

Fantastic summary! I would almost use the word “unbelievable,” but these benefits are all consistent with previous research, and extensive (very conservative) reports of the balance of evidence such as the IPCC reports.

I really appreciate the utility analysis too (converting research findings into dollar estimates), because ideally that can assist policymakers in decision making. Ideally. 😒

The mechanisms are all pretty well understood too—this isn’t speculative—which is why I tend to lean into even more optimistic figures. Within a plant-exclusive diet, as the proportion of whole foods increases, the benefits continue to increase and the risk of certain issues such as cardiovascular disease approaches zero.

So in addition to de-subsidizing meat, dairy, eggs, and fish and subsidizing food for humans, we could theoretically go even further by internalizing the externalized societal costs of the consumption of many packaged and processed foods. The cost of palm oil should reflect the environmental cost of felling rainforests and clogging arteries.

Because the data are so lopsided, any rational and evidence-based proposal will sound extreme. $50 hamburgers!?!?

But actually, yes. And we haven’t even talked about valuing the lives of billions of sentient beings.

Expand full comment
Black Bees's avatar

Thank you for posting this. I feel better that there’s stuff that I like on here. I couldn’t find anything.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts