There should have been a third option: flexitarianism. While vegetarianism is healthy and environmentally responsible, we are by nature omnivores. There need not be shame in eating meat, as long as it's done in moderation. Balance, in all things.
Here is a good article on this subject. It is from MSN.com which is a pretty good source for info.:http://health.msn.c om/fitness/articlepage.as px?cp-documentid=10016673 4
hmmm. very thought provoking article. I'm just not entirely sure where I stand. I'm not a vegeterian; don't have any plans to become one; and I don't feel guilty about it. Not on the grounds of killing for food and certainly not on the grounds of environmental awareness, which I try to uphold anyhow in other ways. The chain effect however, cited in the article is fascinating and believable, just not 'alarming'.
There should have been a third option: flexitarianism. While vegetarianism is healthy and environmentally responsible, we are by nature omnivores. There need not be shame in eating meat, as long as it's done in moderation. Balance, in all things.
People need MODERATION.
Cerrtain meats would have a smaller environmental footprint than others.
The effects of overfishing are far more drastic, most ocean fisheries have already collapsed.
Here is a good article on this subject. It is from MSN.com which is a pretty good source for info.:http://health.msn.c om/fitness/articlepage.as px?cp-documentid=10016673 4
hmmm. very thought provoking article. I'm just not entirely sure where I stand. I'm not a vegeterian; don't have any plans to become one; and I don't feel guilty about it. Not on the grounds of killing for food and certainly not on the grounds of environmental awareness, which I try to uphold anyhow in other ways. The chain effect however, cited in the article is fascinating and believable, just not 'alarming'.