Near Matches
Ignore Exact
Full Text
Conservation of organic resources
created by
niteowl
(
idea
) by
niteowl
(2.4 y)
(
print
)
?
1
C!
I like it!
Thu Oct 12 2000 at 1:21:10
On the
Conservation
of
Organic
Resources
.
Hunger
, it has plagued mankind for longer than perhaps any other problem. The finding of
food
has nearly always been mankind's chief occupation. So great a horror has
hunger
been that the bible even names
famine
has one of the four horseman hailing the approach of the
apocalypse
. Project
Hunger
tells us:
Hunger
persists: Each and every day, 35,000 people die as a consequence of chronic, persistent
hunger
. Between 750 million to 1 billion people live in conditions of
poverty
so severe that they are unable to obtain enough food to meet their daily requirements. This is not the kind of hunger that makes headlines, as in a famine, but a silent
holocaust
that continues day after day, month after month.
Hunger
has been and remains one of the gravest and most difficult problems humanity has ever faced. And yet there is no real world wide shortage of
food
. In America alone we will produce enough grain and soybeans to feed 1,300,000,000 people and use it for animal feed, that's not counting the surpluses purchased by the U.S. government and allowed to rot, nor potential production of
farmers
who receive subsidies not to grow.
If we reduced our
meat
production by just 10% or were able to produce 10% more
food
from those subsidized farmers and the use of those surpluses, that would be sufficient
food
to feed 130 million people annually. If Project
Hunger
s numbers are accurate (And I suspect they are) then only approximately 12,775,000 people are actually dying of starvation annually. This means that those surpluses could easily end world
hunger
ten times over!
One is now immediately forced to ask "why then don't we do that?" The answer alas is not in reality that simple. While those numbers look promising and many
vegetarians
and animal rights activists will repeatedly quote them to illustrate the evils of
meat
consumption, the reality is that Americans are unlikely to cut their
meat
consumption by even 5%. Even if they did, that still doesn't mean that those surpluses would continue to be grown. Nor would they likely be shipped anywhere even if they were.
One must remember that firstly farmers are not government workers, nor do they grow their crops out of any altruistic desire to feed the masses. Rather they are businessmen like any other and their first goal is to turn a profit with their product, indeed must turn a profit if they wish to continue operating their farms.
Now there are two cardinal rules to turning a profit that would seem to most to be fairly self evident. The first is "Don't make a habit of giving your product away for free." And the second would be "Don't waste resources producing more product than your market demands since anything you produce and do not sell is a loss."
The end result of this is that even if through some miracle you were able to get Americans to reduce their meat consumption by that 10%, the economic realities of the situation would force farmers to simply produce 10% less feed product and turn that land and resources instead to something that Americans would buy.
Even presuming that farmers could (and were willing to) sell 10% less of their product while maintaining current production levels without going under, who's going to ship several 100 million tons of grain products world wide at their own expense?
Even project
hunger
, a rather optimistic organization, admits:
"Ending
hunger
is a highly complex challenge. It is increasingly clear that charitable responses and traditional bureaucratic programs, as useful as they may be, are insufficient to carry the day. More importantly, people increasingly recognize that conventional approaches are based on a framework of thinking that is inconsistent with what actually must be done to achieve the end of
hunger
on a sustainable basis."
So it would seem then that the problem of
hunger
is less a question of producing more food than it is a matter of managing our existing
food
resources
more efficiently.
One way we could begin is by instead of producing less
meat
, simply make more efficient use of what
meat
is produced.
Now, given that it is generally accepted that
meat
is one of the least efficient
food
sources to produce, does it not seem insane that on average we waste more than 12,378,767 pounds of viable
meat
, world wide, everyday. What's more these surpluses are not collected in a few well off industrialized nations needing shipment over vast distances to be effective. Nor for that matter would anyone be hurt financially by giving this
meat
away.
So where then is this abundance of
meat
waiting to feed the hungry masses of the
earth
? It's reading this node: it is us. Now before you vote this down in disgust, consider a moment. I'm not talking about killing people for the express purpose of
eating
them. Why bother, millions of people die everyday, and all of us will eventually. Think about that 6 billion people world wide, weighing on average 150 pounds apiece. Now with the rather conservative estimate that only half that weight is actually muscle mass, we're looking at 75 pounds of edible
meat
per person. Presuming that the entire world population will die out and replace itself within the next 100 years that means that within the next century 450 billion pounds of
meat
will be embalmed, burned, cut up by medical students, or buried.
That works out to a lofty 12,378,767 pounds everyday. More than enough to feed those 33,000 everyday who are dying.
Now realizing that most at this point are thinking, "That's disgusting, it's immoral, it's sinful, it's unnatural." I again would ask you to stop and consider, "is it really?" Think about it, intrinsically human
flesh
is no less palatable than the
flesh
of any other
omnivore
like the
pig
, or for that matter many
herbivore
s like
cattle
.
As for immoral, again why? As I said earlier I'm not talking about killing people solely for the sake of eating them, just eating them after they die. And wouldn't it be a much more fitting remembrance of the departed to use their mortal shell to continue and sustain
life
? And if one absolutely must bury or burn something there would still be ample body left after all the viable
meat
was removed. But to continue to use the admittedly vast resources it takes to sustain a human for his/her entire life span and then to take the end product, embalm it with toxic chemicals, and then bury it in an inert box, That's immoral.
As for sinful, where in the bible does it say "Thou shalt not eat thy neighbor?" Nowhere. What's more most Christians practice symbolic ritualistic
cannibalism
on a regular basis, did Jesus not say, "This is my flesh, eat of it." If God truly disapproves of
cannibalism
why doesn't he address the issue? Why does he make acts of symbolic
cannibalism
one of the most sacred rites within his churches?
Unnatural?
Cannibalism
has occurred in one form or another at one time or another in virtually every culture humanity has ever devised. how can a behavior so widely practiced be unnatural.
Many would say, "Sure but you don't see dogs and cats eating each other do you?" True they do not, but I would hasten to point out that we are neither cats nor dogs. What's "natural" varies from animal to animal, and while cats and dogs may not habitually eat each other, their are a great many animals that do. Further if you cut a dog into
meat
y chunks and attempt to feed one dog to another it will eat it unhesitatingly and with great relish.
Looked at from a purely objective rational standpoint there simply is no rational reason for us to continue perpetuating these primitive burial rituals that requires such unforgivable, monumental waste of
organic
resource
s, on a planet that is increasingly more crowded and less able to sustain such wasteful habits.
Now is the time for humanity as a whole to lay aside their ethnocentric cultural biases, accept that our eating habits are based, not on the realities of the universe but unfounded superstition, and do the right thing for our world and as a people as a whole.
Sources
Statistical data on agricultural production provided by a Pulitzer prize nominee John Robbins and his essay "Diet for a New America" Printed in Realities 1989
Quotes from "Project Hunger" were taken from their web page which can be found at "www.thp.org"
Other data drawn from the United States Department of Agriculture at their web page located at "www.usda.gov
printable version
chaos
garbology
Fun with feminine hygiene
Satanic ritual abuse
food
Words from the anti-Christ
overharvesting
non renewable resources
Histosols
a rat for Thanksgiving
PETA
Conservation
Earth
nettle tea
Soylent Green
Middle eastern customs
mankind
life
Farmers
hungry
Cookery
The Worm Forgives the Plough
Unbleached flour
Sorry to bother you
Crop
Y'know, if you
log in
, you can write something here, or contact authors directly on the site.
Create a New User
if you don't already have an account.
Login
Password
remember me
password reminder
register
Everything2 Help
cooled by
moJoe
Things you could have written:
aburage
So you think you're Bruce Lee
Why I write
A battle for consciousness
Dawn at The Wall
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox
I felt a disturbance in the fun, as if a million playgrounds cried out, and then
Great Lakes
Society for the prevention of Haikus
Atrocities in the Bible
Carousel of Progress
Coase Theorem
Advice the KJV Bible has to give about Everything
everyday j.Lo
pray do not molest them
(
thing
)
ammie
Bands Who Take Their Names from Eighteenth-century English Poetry and Prose
(
idea
)
shaogo
Under My Thumb
(
review
)
ammie
Rock On
(
person
)
The Custodian
The Dresden Files
(
thing
)
Ouzo
PETA becomes you, a proposed future
(
fiction
)
Ereneta
Stone Soup, Part Two
(
fiction
)
jjen
Sorrier than I ever thought I would be
(
personal
)
locke baron
Moskva class antisubmarine cruiser
(
thing
)
Wuukiee
May 15, 2008
(
idea
)
locke baron
Kuznetsov class aircraft carrier
(
thing
)
Adaptive Child
Annie's garden salsa
(
recipe
)
Simulacron3
Zig-Zag
(
thing
)
Noung
Tiananmen Square Massacre
(
idea
)
aneurin
Lord St Clair
(
person
)
This page courtesy of
The Everything Development Company