There’s been a groundswell of investor funding in plant-based proteins. It hasn’t led to decreased meat consumption.

by Lela Nargi

04.08.2021, 12:57pmBusinessShareLink Copied!Save for laterBeyond Burgers next to a young red cow. April 2021iStock/Sundry Photography/PamWalker68

Will the alt-meat investment boom change our food system if we don’t invest in eating less meat, too?

In mid-March, alternative-protein-promoting nonprofit Good Food Institute (GFI) released data showing that investment in the alt-meat market surged in 2020, hitting a record high of $3.1 billion. Companies focused on plant meats, eggs, and dairy (as opposed to fermentation and cell-based-meat ventures) accounted for the lion’s share of that windfall, taking in three times the amount of capital they raised in 2019. Hot on the heels of GFI’s report, Boston Consulting Group and Blue Horizon Corporation predicted that alt meat would comprise 11 percent of the protein market by 2035—climbing to 97 million metric tons annually from 13 million now. And several days after that revelation, Food Dive reported that self-identified meat eaters dropped from 85 percent in 2019 to 71 percent in 2020.

All this news gave alt-meat proponents lots of reason for optimism. GFI released a statement from senior investor engagement specialist Sharyn Murray, celebrating the investor community “waking up to the massive social and economic potential of food technology to radically remake our food system.” David Benzaquen, who runs plant-based-consumer research company Moonshot Collaborative, told The Counter that the uptick in funding—mostly by “traditional institutional investors” in Asia—is the “culmination of more people wanting to eat flexitarian and investors recognizing the massive risk from the animal farming industry.”

Still, sales of meat were up 19.2 percent over the past year—including beef from Brazil, a high offender when it comes to chopping down forests for ranching. And while food industry giants like Tyson and Cargill have entered the alt-meat space—and/or, like McDonald’s, which just signed a three-year “McPlant” deal with Beyond Meat—they have yet to declare a synchronous commitment to decreasing livestock production. (The Counter reached out to all three companies; all declined to comment.) In a space initially forged by eco-conscious vegans interested in animal welfare and sustainability goals like lower greenhouse gas emissions and a decreased water footprint, there remains the question of whether expanded investment is reshaping a problematic food system—or just building up a parallel one.

“People going to McDonald’s and Burger King and finding plant-based burgers starts to normalize them as an option and makes them more accessible.”

“I wish these big corporate names would dive in and make a commitment to reduce beef production—we’re in the midst of a climate and extinction crisis and it’s urgent,” said Stephanie Feldstein, population and sustainability director for the Center for Biological Diversity in Tucson, Arizona. Still, she sees investment in plant-based meat as a “first step. This is where [corporations] can see that plant-based burgers are profitable, and at the end of the day that’s what they care about.”

Profitability, she said, is predicated on Americans making a “massive cultural shift” that starts with them being able to sample inexpensive alternatives to beef and chicken. “People going to McDonald’s and Burger King and finding plant-based burgers starts to normalize them as an option and makes them more accessible,” she said. 

Benzaquen said that the pandemic has helped speed this normalization process up. “No plant-based businesses had to [close] due to COVID,” he said (a reference to U.S. slaughterhouse shutdowns, which were also a factor in those increased Brazilian beef imports). As a result, he said, people were compelled to try veggie products when confronted with empty meat shelves at the supermarket. He insists this wasn’t an “Oh, this is cool, I will try it one time type of thing” but rather a “lightbulb moment” that goes hand-in-hand with consumer backlash against the meat industry and having the “extra time to be more conscientious about what you’re eating.” 

“Alt meat is not getting scaled up in a bubble; it’s happening with an increase in demand for more protein. That could come from alt meat or it could come from meat.”

Benzaquen also pushed back against the idea that industry players are greenwashing their businesses with alternative proteins, pointing to Tyson’s initial trouble with its Raised and Rooted line. The products were not 100 percent vegan as advertised, forcing the company to remove eggs when there was backlash. Furthermore, he said, food service operations have limited money and “slots in the fryers to put forward food. Before the veggie burger there were 10 spots” on a fast food menu, each of which was for meat. “Now there are nine or eight, and plant-based products are displacing things.” 

Feldstein is also loath to voice skepticism about corporate interest in fake meat. She believes “it’s always the industry” that benefits when doubt is expressed about whether their motives are pure enough. Feldstein thinks the importance of plant-based meats, no matter who is producing them, has to be considered in context. “Alt meat is not getting scaled up in a bubble; it’s happening with an increase in demand for more protein. That could come from alt meat or it could come from meat,” and the environmental impacts of the former are “negligible” compared to the latter, she claimed. (Although, plant-based diets can have a larger environmental footprint than someone choosing a vegan diet might realize, the BBC reported last year.)

To Feldstein, the larger issue of concern is that the industrialized food system that provides consumers with unsustainable beef is the same one that is locked into using “less-than-perfect ingredients like GMO soy that are destroying the Amazon—it’s the only source” companies like Impossible Foods have. “But the long-term ideal of getting to a more diversified regionally focused food system and away from our current model is a reason to support alt proteins now,” Feldstein added.

“It’s a balancing game between holistic political change and helping consumers make better [food] choices they actually enjoy.”

Linnea Laestadius, public health policy and administration professor at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, sees corporate greenwashing as potentially problematic in this sector. “People are noticing there’s a lot of money in [alt proteins] and as more money enters, the risk of actors [acting badly] increases exponentially,” she said. “We can never rely on corporations choosing to be good actors”—a proclivity she refers to as  criminogenic, “where everyone is cutting corners and needs to stay competitive, and that will never change unless we see policy change.”

Merely focusing on plant-based meat replacements is too narrow a goal, Laestadius believes. She’d like to see institutional purchasers demanding transparency from both meat- and plant-based companies about sourcing, and for that sourcing to include more ethical ingredients and better labor standards—issues that even vegan companies can tend to gloss over. “Unfortunately, we’re on a really tight timeline to figure stuff out, which means it’s a balancing game between holistic political change and helping consumers make better [food] choices they actually enjoy,” Laestadius said.

How much such concerns will impact future funding streams is anyone’s guess. However, said Benzaquen, “Institutional investors recognize that consumer [interest] is not letting up, and this is far beyond a fad. Everyone who bet against it before made a mistake.”

This Facebook Group Takes Seitan Worship To The Next Level

Love the wheat-based meat alternative? Meet The Seitan Appreciation Society.By Julia Tausch04/09/2021 05:45am EDT

In 2018, I joined The Seitan Appreciation Society, the greatest Facebook group on earth. Seitan ― pronounced “say-TAN,” not “satan” ― is an often misunderstood meat substitute, not to be confused with the devil. It also shouldn’t be confused with other meat substitutes like tofu and tempeh, in that seitan isn’t made from soy, but rather wheat.

Since joining the group, I’ve spent most Sundays whipping up scrumptious fake meat based on the group’s latest insights and ideas. I’ve upped my vegan cooking game tenfold, thanks to the group, but my obsession has always felt a bit niche and weird. When I tell my friends about The Society, I know I’m giving them “One time? At band camp?” vibes.

So, imagine how my heart leaped to discover that Gen Z has been happily making seitan on TikTok, inspired by user futurelettuce’s “two ingredient vegan chicken.” The trend’s been covered everywhere, and YouTube is ablaze with attempts. The moment I watched futurelettuce’s video, I knew he, too, was a Society member. He quickly confirmed this over email and agreed with me that some of the most innovative plant-based cooking going on today is happening in the group. Thanks to futurelettuce, seitan has entered the zeitgeist. It’s time to spread the word.THE MORNING EMAILWake up to the day’s most important news.Successfully Subscribed!Realness delivered to your inbox

But what the heck is seitan?

In much of the English-speaking world, seitan refers to a meat substitute made from gluten, the protein component of wheat. It can be made two ways: with vital wheat gluten, a powdered form of already-isolated protein; or by kneading a ball of dough underwater to wash the starch away. The latter takes longer, but it’s thrilling to watch the stretchy, protein-blob emerge, then cook it into fibrous “meat.”

(And if you’re wondering why vegans would want to eat something meat-like, futurelettuce puts it simply: “Veganism isn’t about not eating meat. It’s about not eating animals.”)

Seitan is nothing new, as many responders to futurelettuce were quick to point out; nor is it a “weird white vegan thing.” Of her Singaporean Chinese heritage, Society member Jaki Teo wrote on Instagram: “Mock meat is so common in our dietary culture that nobody gives a single f. Vegans eat it, non-vegans eat it, and we even offer it to dead people at their graves.”

Yancy Nurse, a commenter on BuzzFeed’s futurelettuce post, also reminisced about her Barbadian grandmother washing flour. “I never knew where she learned it from,” Nurse told HuffPost. “But when she made it, everyone showed up. Even meat eaters loved it!”

Futurelettuce told BuzzFeed: “People have [asked] ‘How did you figure this out?’ Which I feel bad about because these methods date back to China thousands of years ago.”

Indeed, gluten-based faux sausage and eel recipes appear in Chinese texts as early as 1301. In America, the 1930s gluten experiments of the Seventh-day Adventists birthed, among other curiosities, canned veggie hotdogs. A jerky-like product dubbed seitan was brought to America from Japan in the late 1960s by macrobiotics founder George Ohsawa, and the word evolved to refer to all gluten products in English. Western seitan recipes have become increasingly complex, but until I joined The Society I had no idea I could come close to the deliciousness I’d tasted at Buddhist vegetarian restaurants in my own kitchen.

<img src="; alt="The Farm Vegetarian Cookbook, 1975. Residents of the <a href="">famous Tennessee commune</a> learned to make gluten from the Seventh-day Adventist cookbook "<a href="">Ten Talents,"
The Farm Vegetarian Cookbook, 1975. Residents of the famous Tennessee commune learned to make gluten from the Seventh-day Adventist cookbook “Ten Talents,” according to former farm resident and current society member Nancy Jones Presley.

Enter The Seitan Appreciation Society

The first time I scrolled through the Facebook group, my jaw dropped. Home cooks from all over the world were making gluten-based steaks, turkeys, hams, lambs, spam, bologna, salami, bacon, bratwurst, pork belly, salmon, drumsticks, wings, nuggets, oxtails — any meat I plugged into the search bar brought back hits.

For flavor and texture, people used miso, wine, douchi, molasses, MSG, cocoa, coffee, marmite, rice paper, sourdough, sauerkraut, yuba, tapioca, “bones” made of parsnips, beetroot powder, and on and on. Techniques ranged from simple braising and roasting to sous vide and brining for days. I couldn’t sleep for inspiration.

The Society was created in May of 2017 by U.K.-based Mike Rigby, a tireless admin of many vegan groups. “Lacey Siomos was well-established as an amazing home chef, so I picked her straight away to help set it up,” Rigby said.

Siomos, the inventor of Chickwheat — a shredded chicken sub made from chickpeas, vital wheat gluten and a solid eight minutes in the food processor — was perfecting those elusive shreds when Rigby reached out.

“I’m a big fan of open source,” Siomos said. “We wanted a way to share ideas.”

Lacey Siomos’ chickwheat shreds.
Lacey Siomos’ chickwheat shreds.

“Once the geniuses of the seitan game moved in,” Rigby explained, “we had a lot of interest.”

Today, The Society has almost 80,000 members and grows every day. Though some early heavy hitters have moved on, there’s no shortage of geniuses. “Like, it’s actual food science. Molecular gastronomy. It’s fascinating,” Siomos said. “It started back with Buddhist chefs and now there are people all across the globe making amazing seitan.”

The Influencers:


Aleksandra Feodorovna’s ham, created using a pâte feuilletée technique.
Aleksandra Feodorovna’s ham, created using a pâte feuilletée technique.

No one in the group makes more elegant fake meats than Aleksandra Feodorovna. Her posts have included filet mignon, salmon en papillote, steak tartare, a turducken, and a pâte feuilletée-inspired ham.

“I started cooking with my grandmother when I was 5,” said Feodorovna, an addiction counselor born in Mexico, based in Houston. “She was the first person I ever saw washing flour — this is 1966. Meat in Mexico then was expensive. I was mesmerized that a ball of dough turned into something like that!”

“Cooking is my form of activism,” Feodorovna added. “I share my food with co-workers and friends. Pâte feuilletée isn’t a technique for everybody — it takes a long time. But the results are amazing. I took that ham to work and they were like, ‘This is meat.’ And I’m like, ‘No, it’s wheat.’”

Currently, Feodorovna is documenting her non-seitan cooking in a group of her own and is working on a cookbook. “Mike has provided a wonderful meeting place for everybody,” she said.

Kat Ott

Kat Ott’s deli turkey.
Kat Ott’s deli turkey.

Blogger and mom Kat Ott’s lunchmeat recipes have been many members’ (including futurelettuce’s) first seitans.

“I was inspired to dive deeper into experimenting once I joined The Society,” Ott said. “I was spending a lot on prepackaged vegan lunchmeats for my kids. I wanted to create a deli turkey that would slice super thin like the brands they liked.”

She nailed that and many more.

Yessica Infante

Yessica Infante’s washed flour brisket with chimichurri sauce.
Yessica Infante’s washed flour brisket with chimichurri sauce.

While Ott and Feodorovna remain vital wheat gluten devotees, the washed flour method is having a moment. Yessica Infante, a sports center employee and mom from California, eliminated meat and dairy for health, but her family once enjoyed wings and steak.

“I love the chewiness,” Infante said. “I was like, ‘If we’re going to make this work, I have to have some mock meat we’re all going to enjoy.’ When I learned to wash flour, I couldn’t believe it. The flavor was so good.”

Infante now has YouTube tutorials for drumsticks, brisket, tacos al pastor and oxtails in birria sauce (jicama and rice paper stand in for bones and tissue).

“My family has a rating system,” she said with a laugh. “If a recipe’s an 8 out of 10 or above, I post it. If not, I play around more.”

The Society’s support gave her the confidence to start her channel. “People in the group are asking for my recipe, so why not deliver?”

Mark Thompson, aka Sauce Stache

Mark Thompson’s latest seitan creation for his YouTube channel, Sauce Stache.
Mark Thompson’s latest seitan creation for his YouTube channel, Sauce Stache.

Like everyone else I spoke to, Infante cites as an influence Mark Thompson, aka Sauce Stache. And Thompson, when we chatted, cited Infante right back. “I hope her stuff takes off,” he said. “During this seitan boom people are sharing my videos, but it’s like, share hers! That brisket’s mind-blowing!”

This enthusiasm permeates his channel — a food-sciencey test kitchen devoted to plant-based everything (including cracking the code on Beyond Meat sausages’ snap).

During a bout of vegan bacon tests, commenter Nigel Frazer-Ashbrook, a sign language interpreter from Scotland whose butter beany creation was ripping through The Society, suggested Thompson try his recipe. Thompson did a riff and promptly joined The Society himself.

While Thompson’s experiments have brought ingredients like methylcellulose to the seitan sphere, the inspiration goes both ways. Society member Oncle Hu’s pastrami, which involves washing out less starch to create “fatty” pockets, was the latest innovation to inspire a Sauce Stache video. “That was something really wild,” Thompson said.

Back to the future(lettuce)

Futurelettuce, too, is an Oncle Hu fan: “We message back and forth, he taught me a lot.” When I ask how it feels to have made washed flour viral, he’s thoughtful. “If I were wanting to see something on TikTok that was surprising … well, washing flour was something that surprised me more than anything.”

“I have a bit of regret that I didn’t go into more detail in the first video,” he added. “Some people don’t wash enough. They end up with fried bread. My dream is that someone watches, goes, ‘That’s interesting!’ and looks it up. I didn’t even have measurements! It’s as basic as it gets.”

If you’re ready to get beyond basic, The Society is here for you. While it is full of geniuses, the soul of the group are the thousands of members who share daily encouragement, techniques, incredible tutorial recommendations and jokes about how stretched gluten looks like, well, see for yourself below.

Come join us (read the pinned FAQ!) and sink your teeth into homemade meat made of wheat!

Your Diet Is Cooking the Planet

But two simple changes can help.ANNIE LOWREY6:00 AM ET

A woven bag containing carrots, apples, two oranges, and some greens, against a lavender background

What’s for dinner?

On a planet wracked by rising seas, expanding deserts, withering biodiversity, and hotter temperatures, that’s a fraught question to answer. Food production accounts for roughly a quarter of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions, and scientists have found that limiting global warming will be impossible without significant changes to how the world eats. At the same time, climate change is threatening the world’s food supply, with land and water being exploited at an “unprecedented” pace.  

A new guide to living through climate change

The Weekly Planet brings you big ideas and vital information to help you flourish on a changing planet.Join the Newsletter

Reforming the food system to save the planet is going to require new corporate practices, and new laws and regulations at the national and international levels. But individual consumer behaviors matter as well—more than you might think. Your diet is likely one of your biggest sources of climate emissions. But what should you do? Eat locally? Get your food from small-scale farmers? Choose organics and fair trade? Avoid processed foods? Eat seasonally?

The choices are many; the stakes are high. But experts on land use, climate change, and sustainable agriculture told me that two habits tower above all others in terms of environmental impact. To help save the planet, quit wasting food and eat less meat.

The conservation nonprofit Rare analyzed a sweeping set of climate-change mitigation strategies in 2019. It found that getting households to recycle, switch to LED lighting and hybrid vehicles, and add rooftop solar systems would save less than half the carbon emissions combined than would reducing food waste and adopting a plant-based diet.

Let’s begin with the role of food waste. Americans waste a lot of food. Nearly one-third of it, in fact. More than 130 billion pounds a year, worth roughly $160 billion. We throw away enough food to close our own “meal gap” eight times over. Food is the single biggest component of our country’s landfills, and the average American sends more than 200 pounds of food there every year. More than 1,250 calories per person a day, or more than 140 trillion calories a year, get tossed in the garbage.

Households, not restaurants or schools or corporate cafeterias, are the dominant wasters. The problem is worse in the United States than in most other countries, and it has worsened over time. When you toss a spoiled chicken breast or moldy tomato into the trash, you’re wasting a greenhouse-gas-intensive product. You’re also sending it to a landfill, where it will emit methane.

Addressing food waste would be low-hanging fruit: The country could save money, emit less carbon into the atmosphere, alleviate the burden on landfills, reduce the number of animals subjected to life on a factory farm, and address its hunger crisis just by eating all the food it makes. Households consuming more of what they buy, and thus buying less, would have a major effect on the whole food system. Food suppliers would produce less to meet the country’s more efficient demand. Supermarkets would stock less food. Fewer trucks would need to run from plant to store. Fewer refrigerators would be needed in stores and industrial facilities to keep groceries cold. Fewer cows would fill up feedlots. Fewer acres of corn and soy would be grown to feed them.

How to do it? For one, get wise about expiration labels and quit throwing out perfectly good food. Research shows that nearly all Americans misinterpret date labels and toss their groceries out prematurely, for fear of food poisoning, and understandably so. Retailers and production companies use 50 different use by–type labels, and none is federally regulated, except for those on infant formula. sell by stamps tend to be for inventory management, and have nothing to do with food safety; best if used by and use by stamps tend to be about freshness and food quality, not whether you are about to enjoy a serving of mycotoxins. As a general point, most food is safe to eat as long as there is no evident spoilage, such as visible mold or an off smell. “Use your senses,” says Yvette Cabrera of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the conservation nonprofit, noting that those senses were refined through millennia of natural selection in no small part to help us figure out whether food is safe to eat.


What Makes Collaboration In Health Care Hard?


Experts also point to a series of simple, old-fashioned techniques households can use to ensure that they eat more of the food they buy. They amount to thinking like your Depression-era forebears, pretty much. Figure out appropriate portion sizes; eat your leftovers; store food in appropriate containers and at the right temperature; prepare and freeze perishables instead of letting them linger and go bad; and shop in your refrigerator and cabinet before you hit the store.

And when you’re at the store, there is one dietary change to consider that beats all others in terms of its climate impact. It is not eating locally or seasonally. It is not eating organic or fair-trade. It is not eating unprocessed foods or avoiding big-box and fast-food retailers. It is eating less meat. Roughly three-quarters of the world’s farmland is used to pasture livestock or raise crops to feed that livestock. That contributes to deforestation, destroys the planet’s natural carbon sinks, erodes the planet’s biodiversity, and uses up fresh water.

The main, mooing offender is beef. Cattle are responsible for roughly two-thirds of the livestock sector’s greenhouse-gas emissions, while beef and dairy products are responsible for about one-tenth of global emissions overall. Gram for gram, beef produces roughly eight times more greenhouse-gas emissions than farmed fish or poultry, 12 times more than eggs, 25 times more than tofu, and even more compared with pulses, nuts, root vegetables, bananas, potatoes, bread, or maize.

Beef is so bad for two reasons, Michael Clark, a scholar of food systems and health at the University of Oxford, explained to me. The first is that it takes a lot of inputs to produce beef as an output: about 20 kilograms of corn and soy protein to produce one kilogram of beef, he said. The second is that cows produce methane as they digest their food. “Other types of animals don’t do that,” he said. “And methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.”

Trading your rib eyes and cheesesteaks for lentils and tofu is one of the best things you can do as a consumer for the environment; if all Americans did, the country would be roughly halfway to hitting its Paris Agreement targets. Still, the all-or-nothing way the choice is often presented is a mistake. There is enormous acreage between the Atkins diet, or even the meat-heavy diet of the average American, and full-on veganism, which remains a niche lifestyle choice that few follow for long. Better all Americans cut meat consumption by 40 percent than 3 percent of Americans cut it out completely. Experts encourage taking small, meaningful steps to reduce your meat consumption, and trying to find some joy in doing it. Participate in Meatless Monday; try learning to cook dishes from a plant-heavy cuisine you like; offer a vegetarian option at work events; opt for dishes where meat plays a supporting, rather than leading, role.

After wasting less food and eating less meat, all other changes a person might make are marginal, experts said, among them eating locally, organically, and seasonally. Moreover, the climate impact of those food choices is in many cases contradictory. “I work in food, and it’s confusing for me,” Cabrera, of the NRDC, told me. “Is this lettuce better than this lettuce? Consumers are faced with so many choices, and it is really hard to know.”

Humanely raised, local meat, for instance, can produce more emissions than meat coming from a concentrated industrial operation, Clark told me. Cows in concentrated animal-feeding operations are generally slaughtered at 12 to 18 months of age, while cows raised exclusively on pastures typically live twice as long. “The cow that lives for longer is going to emit more methane over the course of its lifespan,” he said, though he added that there were still compelling reasons to opt for the local beef.

Similarly, growing a given amount of organic produce usually requires more emissions and acres of land than growing the same amount using conventional farming methods. One study conducted in Sweden, for instance, showed that organic peas and wheat have a bigger climate impact than their conventionally farmed cousins.

That said, when it comes to the emissions related to shipping food around the world, experts argue that—surprisingly—local is not always better. There’s a certain uncanny decadence to eating Peruvian avocados and Chinese grapes in the dead of winter, or opening a bottle of French Beaujolais or a package of Scottish smoked salmon at will. But transporting food around the world tends to make up only a small share of a given product’s total greenhouse-gas emissions. What you are eating and how it was farmed is far more important than how it got to you, and imported food typically has a low carbon impact.

For all that, experts said there are good reasons to opt for organic, locally produced, seasonal food, even if it might not be as efficient to produce, or might not have the lowest greenhouse-gas emissions. Many smaller-scale operations outside Big Ag produce food without pesticides, without monoculture, with manure instead of chemical fertilizers, and with respect for biodiversity and soil health. Those are all important facets of environmental preservation too.

Complicating things, what’s good for the environment isn’t always what’s good for animal welfare. When it comes to eating animals, “unfortunately, the cruelty scale is the flip of the emissions scale,” Leah Garcés, the president of Mercy for Animals, a nonprofit that advocates for better conditions for animals raised in industrial environments, told me. A family can easily eat a chicken in a single night, but might struggle to eat a whole cow over the course of a year. Moreover, transportation and processing is much rougher on birds, which have delicate bodies. (Each year, more than 1 million chickens die en route to slaughter, and half a million are not actually dead when they hit the scalding tank.) For these reasons, a chicken breast represents much more suffering than a steak, even though the steak is worse for the planet. But the fact remains: The fewer animals you eat, the fewer die, and the better off the planet is.

Diets that are good for the planet tend to be good for people too. Research by Clark and his colleagues has shown that foods associated with good health generally have low environmental impacts, “indicating that the same dietary transitions that would lower incidences of noncommunicable diseases would also help meet environmental sustainability targets.”

Our diets are cooking the planet, and changing them, even in small ways, might help avert catastrophe. A burger for lunch, a bag of wilted greens in the trash—these may not be as obviously destructive to the environment as a private jet or a gas-guzzling car. But they are choices we make daily, and they matter.


 By: Colin Ruloff   |   Reading time: 15 minutes
I used to eat animals but I no longer do. I gave up the practice about six years ago. When confronted by my meat-eating friends about why I’ve given up eating animals, it’s tacitly assumed that I’m expected to provide an argument or present reasons for why eating animals is wrong. But why, I ask myself, do I have to present reasons for why eating animals is eating wrong? Surely the burden of proof is with my meat-eating friends to show that eating animals is somehow OK. After all, they’re the ones that are choosing to eat a once-sentient being. So, let’s ask: Are there any good reasons for eating animals?
Before we try to answer that question, it’s worth briefly describing where our meat comes from. 

The vast majority of meat, dairy, and eggs produced in the United States and Canada come from animals raised on factory farms. A “factory farm” is a large-scale, high-intensity, industrial complex that breeds and raises large numbers of animals so that we can harvest their meat, milk, and eggs for consumption.

Billions of animals are raised and killed for food around the world each year. Although the majority of people consider them food, research shows that farmed animals are intelligent and emotionally complex, like dogs, cats, and other animals that so many of us see as companions.Animals Are More Sentient Than You Think: Ethologist Jordi Casamitjana says we can see animals are sentient because “they can feel, experience, and judge, and once they have judged, they can behave accordingly.” 

Why, then, is it hard for us to see all animals as sentient beings? “In a world where animal exploitation is heavily entrenched in most aspects of all human societies, commercial and cultural forces constantly work to deny the quality of sentience to non-human animals. Even when today’s science clearly shows most animals are sentient, this denial is mainstream,” writes Casamitjana, who is the author of “Ethical Vegan: A Personal and Political Journey to Change the World.”
 Chickens Are Smart (and Yes, They Can Suffer): Chickens are widely considered to be unintelligent, possibly because we view these birds as food animals. In fact, chickens account for 95 percent of the animals farmed for food globally. But research shows these birds are smart, can show empathy, and are capable of feeling pain. 

Jennifer Mishler explores what we know about the minds of chickens, considering information from experts such as Dr. Lori Marino, to answer the questions: “How smart are these birds, and what might they be thinking and feeling?”
 Sentience: What It Means and Why It’s Important: As our name suggests, sentience is at the heart of what we do at Sentient Media. Dr. Jane Kotzmann weighs in on what it means.

“‘Sentient’ is an adjective that describes a capacity for feeling. The word sentient derives from the Latin verb sentire, which means ‘to feel,’” writes Kotzmann. “Sentient beings experience wanted emotions like happiness, joy, and gratitude, and unwanted emotions in the form of pain, suffering, and grief.

Kotzmann believes animal sentience is being increasingly recognized, which makes it a worthy topic of discussion in any circle. If we can simply agree “that sentient beings are capable of experiencing pain and suffering,” she writes, “most humans would further agree that it is morally wrong to inflict unnecessary pain or suffering.”
 Study: Emotional Well-Being of Cows Is Harmed by Denying Outdoor Access: new study conducted by researchers at Queen’s University Belfast and published in the journal Scientific Reports found that cows are less happy if kept indoors. Furthermore, the researchers found that being outside allowed the cows to engage in behaviors natural to them—concerning, given the confinement they experience on factory farms.

“Pasture access can promote natural behavior [and] improve cows’ health, and cows, given the choice, spend most of their time outside. However, the effects of pasture access on dairy cows’ psychological well-being have been poorly understood—that is what our judgment bias study intended to measure,” said Dr. Gareth Arnott.
 Read more from Sentient Media.We’re reporting the truth about animal agriculture. Your donation fuels our work.
Animals in factory farms are typically packed into confinement facilities. Broiler chickens, for instance, are crammed into massive windowless warehouses, and are denied fresh air, sunshine, and pasture. These sheds contain anywhere from 10,000 to 50,000 birds. Sows are confined to small metal crates on concrete slatted floors with no straw or bedding to lie on and without fresh air or sunlight.

When the animals are ready to be harvested they are then crammed onto eighteen-wheelers and shipped on multiday journeys to the slaughterhouse without food or water. Once they arrive, they are in a weakened physical and psychological state. The animals are hungry and exhausted, confused and frightened. Once inside the slaughterhouse, the animals are jammed into metal shackles, strung upside down (which often causes the breaking of limbs), and brought to the slaughterer.

OK, enough of the gruesome details. Let’s return to the question I posed at the outset: are there any good reasons for eating animals? More exactly, the question I want to ask is this: is it OK to inflict intense suffering on factory-farmed animals so that we might eat them?

I’ve encountered quite a few arguments that try to show that it’s OK to inflict suffering on factory-farmed animals; but instead of examining all of them, I’ll just focus on the four or five arguments that most people find persuasive.

Read the full story here.



A controversial tweet revived the debate.Getty ImagesKATIE MACBRIDE3.24.2021 12:40 PM

ON TUESDAY, musician, author, and noted vegan, Moby, tweeted:


While it’s might be easy to dismiss his statement as a celebrity weighing in on a subject about which he has no expertise, it is reasonable to question how our relationship to animals might be contributing to pandemics. Our current pandemic, after all, is hypothesized to be the result of a virus that jumped from an animal species to humans — likely a bat.

It’s unquestionably true that our relationship to animals plays a big part in whether or not pandemics happen, Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, tells Inverse. But it’s not the physical consumption of the animal that’s usually the problem, Adalja says — it’s how we live and how the animal ends up on our plate.

Moby, veganism, tweet
Moby’s controversial tweet on Tuesday ignited a debate about veganism.Moby

“It’s not getting a chicken sandwich from Chick-fil-A that’s causing bird flu to be an issue,” Adalja says. “It’s the way we raise it.”

As humans, we’re animals on a planet with other animals — it’s inevitable that we’re going to interact with species other than our own. “You can get bitten by a raccoon and get rabies, not because you were going to eat it, but just because you happened to encounter it in the wild,” Adalja says.

In fact, there are a number of really damaging diseases that have nothing to do with eating animals, even though those diseases can be transferred through animal vectors. For example, malaria is transmitted by mosquitos and Lyme disease is transmitted from deers to humans by ticks. It’s the “no pandemics” element of Moby’s message that’s the most incorrect.


What matters more than eating animals is how we’re interacting with animals.

Although it’s true that most of the recent diseases found in humans in recent decades are pathogens that jumped from animals to humans, there’s actually a lot that needs to go right in order for an animal borne-pathogen to become a human pandemic.

There are a few hurdles any pathogen needs to be able to accomplish before it becomes a pandemic in humans, Adalja explains.

  • It needs to be able to jump from an animal to a human effectively
  • Once in the human, it needs to cause some kind of disease
  • That disease needs to be contagious (humans have to be able to pass it to each other effectively)

Throughout history, there have been sporadic outbreaks that “came and went on their own” after a pathogen jumps from animals to humans, Adalja explains.

The difference now, he says, is how we live. And that’s more complicated than just whether or not we consume animals or animal products.

“As humans, we evolved to be omnivores,” Adalja says. “10,000 years ago, there were no vegans. There were also no pandemics.”


Other than the fact that many humans still eat animals, everything else about how we live has changed since 10,000 years ago. We transitioned from a hunter-gatherer society to an agricultural society. We started having more people living in one place and population density begins to increase.

Adalja says that humans also, “started going to the bathroom where they lived and domesticating animals.” But even then, we didn’t start seeing the really big pandemics until industrialization.


That doesn’t mean there were no plagues (the plague of Athens might have something to say). But even the Black Death in the mid-1300s was largely the result of population density, urbanization, and people interacting with each other more — not animal consumption.

Now, we’re more packed into spaces than we ever have been. And while our hygiene and understanding and treatment of diseases is infinitely better than it was in the 1300s, there’s one really big difference that adds to our pandemic risk: how small our world has become.

“An outbreak that happens on one side of the globe can get to the other side of the globe before you have even noticed it,” Adalja says. “And that’s what happened with Covid-19.”

Globalization, the rise of megacities, and increased population density have increased the rates and severity of pandemics more so than consuming animals and animal products, Adalja says.


In some ways, yes. Our consumption of animals isn’t entirely unrelated to some pandemics, and, when it is related, it’s important to understand how we can change our behavior to minimize risk as much as possible.

Dr. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist, responds to Moby.Angela Rasmussen

Some studies suggest we could further reduce our risk of some pandemics by changing the way we farm animals. This is especially true for influenza viruses stemming from birds. A 2008 study looking at biosecurity and farming explains, “The high throughput and confinement of highly concentrated animal populations increases the intensity of microbial exposures for farmers, their families, farmworkers, veterinarians, and others in contact with these operations.”

A different study from 2008 stresses the importance of biosafety measures and educating workers, especially poultry workers, about best practices. The study, published in Public Health Reports, concludes:

“Critical components of worker protection include educating employers and training poultry workers about occupational exposure to avian influenza viruses. Other recommendations for protecting poultry workers include the use of good hygiene and work practices, personal protective clothing and equipment, vaccination for seasonal influenza viruses, antiviral medication, and medical surveillance.”

Adalja agrees. “Most of the time, those transmission events can be minimized if you just actually practice biosafety,” he says. “That might mean if you’re butchering an animal, you’re washing your hands, or not doing it with open arms, or rubbing your eyes or doing whatever it might be.”

Global monitoring and transparency would also go a long way to preventing potential pandemics by stopping the disease locally before it has a chance to spread as much as Covid-19 did.

If you want to go vegan or have a primarily plant-based diet, there are plenty of environmental and health reasons to do so. Preventing pandemics isn’t really one of them.

Meanwhile, there’s always tofu.


 By: Nico Stubler & Elan Abrell   |   Reading time: 5 minutes
On March 11, U.S. Senator Cory Booker and U.S. Representatives Rosa DeLauro and Bennie Thompson (D-MS) reintroduced the Safe Line Speeds During COVID-19 Act, which would suspend all current and future waivers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture that allowed slaughterhouses to increase slaughter line speeds during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the successful passage of this bill could be an improvement over current conditions at many slaughterhouses, it is just a start. 
Big Meat—like Big Oil, Big Tobacco, and Big Pharma—is a ravenous exploitation machine pursuing profits at any cost. It readily treats its workers, the public’s health, and the environment with the same sacrificial logic as it treats the billions of terrestrial animals it farms and kills every year.

It is clear that adequately addressing the harms of this industry requires ambitious policies that confront the problem head-on, such as banning the sale of meat altogether. 

Industrial farms claim the lives of billions of animals around the globe each year to feed the global demand for meat.U.S. Meat Consumption Is Growing at an Alarming Rate: Despite an increasing number of companies producing meatless alternatives and growing interest among consumers in plant-based products, U.S. meat consumption is growing.

“As of 2017, America had the second-highest meat consumption in the world, surpassed only by Hong Kong,” writes Caroline Christen, who explores the questions: “How much meat do Americans eat, and what are the impacts of their meat consumption?”
 Factory Farming Is on the Rise, But Communities Are Fighting Back: “The number of animals being raised in intensive confinement has increased significantly in the last decade alone,” writes Claire Hamlett. “This uncontrolled expansion is now a major driver of environmental destruction and pollution and a significant threat to public health,” 

Yet, in the face of the industry’s growth, communities are turning against factory farming and taking action.
 Why Protein Isn’t a Problem for Vegans: Among the most common questions vegans hear are, “How do you get your protein?” Yet, research shows that protein deficiency is not a problem among vegans.

Not only can vegans easily incorporate plant-based sources of protein into their diets, but Matthew Chalmers writes, “In the developed world, rather than failing to meet the daily requirement of protein, many exceed the necessary daily intake of protein by a substantial amount—the average intake of an American adult is around 90 grams of protein per day. This in itself can have bad outcomes for one’s health.”
 Can Veganism Help End World Hunger?: Although veganism alone cannot solve the problem of hunger around the world, which as Matthew Chalmers writes, is “an issue that primarily hinges around the distribution of food and not necessarily the creation of it,” it could be part of the solution.

“The widespread adoption of a vegan diet would have enormous positive implications for the globe, freeing up large quantities of land and producing more food with fewer resources,” writes Chalmers.
 Read more from Sentient Media.We are reporting the truth about secretive animal agriculture. Your donation fuels our work.
The industry’s cruel response to the COVID-19 pandemic has in many ways highlighted the extent to which it is willing to sacrifice its workers.

Slaughterhouses quickly emerged as epicenters of infection, and subsequent reports reveal Big Meat intentionally concealed early cases while continuing to force employees to work closely together without protection

Just as the industry has become a leader in human rights violations and public health threats, so too has it become one of the most significant threats to the environment. Commonly cited reports from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimate that Big Meat contributes anywhere between 14.5 percent and 51 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Given both the quantity and quality of these collective harms, it is not a stretch to say that the animal industrial complex’s hyper-externalization of all these costs onto the public and the environment has brought us to the brink of multiple disasters

Read the full story here.