I think in this discussion that we need to distinguish between meat per se & factory farming (what you call
conventional meat production).
Using data collected primarily by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization, scientists have compared the environmental impacts of
conventional meat production with those of alternative sources of food.
The resulting product is 100 percent real meat, but without the antibiotics, E. coli, salmonella, or waste contamination — all of which come standard in
conventional meat production.
The resulting product is 100 percent real meat, but without the antibiotics, E. coli, salmonella, or waste contamination — all of which come standard in
conventional meat production.
The result is 100 - percent real meat, but without the antibiotic residues and bacterial contamination that come standard in
conventional meat production.
Not exact matches
Since beginning to evaluate animal protein
production alternatives that may even prove to be environmentally sustainable (see my posts on carbon - farmed
meat Part I and Part II), inexpensive, industrial, widely - available,
conventional meat is increasingly a no - go for me.
ARTIFICAL HORMONES: A study in the International Journal of Obesity from researchers at 10 different universities, including Yale University School of Medicine and Johns Hopkins Unversity, found that the use of steroid hormones in
meat production and on
conventional dairy farms could be a possible contributor to the obesity epidemic.
I also stick with my Dot Earth proposal that foie gras should be the first profitable example of cultivated
meat given the super-proliferative nature of liver tissue and the ethical questions related to
conventional production of this delicacy.
(I also stick with my Dot Earth proposal that foie gras should be the first profitable example of cultivated
meat given the super-proliferative nature of liver tissue and the ethical questions related to
conventional production of this delicacy.)