this is a journal created to clarify some common misinformation. tw for political subjects. i wanted to keep it unbiased and i really do a lot of fact checking before i make any chapter because im only doing it to help people form their own opinions and learn new things. correct me if i put anything untrue in here and please warn me when i come off as biased on accident. i hope not to do either and you can plagiarise this if you don't wanna do schoolwork ig, i'd actually be flattered. thank you!

published on July 1210 reads 10 readers 0 not completed

"overpopulation of animals could happen if we didn't eat them"

actually, overpopulation more often happens to the ones we *do* eat.

as the human population of meat eaters increases, ironically, so does the number of animals destined for shelf life. regular humans do not keep animal population under control. if anything, farmers govern their population more than any other force in nature. this is because farms breed more animals than we consume which is obviously to supply demand.

since the modern day, the meat we have bought via corporate supermarkets has never come from hunting. animals were purposefully bred and grown if they were sold in one, and thus basically every time you pick up meat there, you have not killed a single animal in the wild. infact, you have just taken from what one could call a machine that will keep spitting out animals like cellphones. it is a system comparable to a hydra; every one you buy creates more than you will ever know how to count to.

more farmland is needed to raise the animals who are wanted for consumption. then the forest gets cut down to expand that farmland because a common theme that applies to much outside of this subject is that something must grow for it to still be relevant- in this case affordable, stocked, and widespread. in conclusion, the farmland will always need to have more animals than what is bought and this is why being a meat-eater does not mean you are significantly bettering the world with any type of population control in that way.

the rest is an additional piece just for thought which i would be happy to know you read;

the world population is estimated to grow to 11 billion by 2088 because we are also always increasing just like the farmland and farm animals. many will be americans but nearly every country is reproducing, just note that this example only accounts for the US because it was one of the easiest to get statistics on. only 2-5% of people in the US report avoiding meat products in general.

so to feed the vast majority, which is 98% of the (aforementioned to be rising) 329,163,005 meat-eaters, farmers will continue to make more of their animals proliferate until that number is surpassed in the hundred thousands, creating the issue of space and poor health in many worse off places just trying to one up it right now.

the motto being a farmland will always need more animals than what is bought no matter the cost.

a typical farm raises chickens, cows, goats, pigs, and sheep in the US. there are often not other animals and farmers have to kill some other species, namely wolves, coyotes, foxes, and snakes for the benefit of the former few, which are often not allowed to play back into the food-web off the farm.

many animals in the food-web are connected to those latter mentions, or "the predators" despite them being equally necessary to a life cycle, meaning without them they will either overpopulate until they are unhealthy or die off, maybe even becoming extinct. a few in this specific chain include mice, hawks, eagles, rabbits, owls, deer, squirrels, beavers, meese, caribou, and minks.

when the food-web plays a great and significant role in our lives and is also a major balancing act in nature, any extinctionization or disruption of a species has the effect of a meteor shower on a small innocent pond. people find extinctionization mentally devastating, studies have shown it poorly impact even on abiotic life, and it truly can wreak havoc on the way all seemingly arbitrary lifeforms live. it could change them, it could kill them, and humans will feel the difference eventually.

so back to the origins again, as the farm expands, so does the need to cut down the trees known as "deforestation." it is only to show love for the animals that people crave. the other's lose their homes as a parasitic trade off. then the need to murder the other animals who will never be bred back to life like the foxes and the wolves increases because those ones may try to sneakily live on the farmland with no place to go.

animals in the food-web who cannot adapt to live off the surplus of cows and chickens, which they are not even allowed to have, will die and that's ineveitable. most farmers do not develope an incentive to revive something that isn't a cash-cow. and there isn't a better way to get them to leave the property when the woods are gone to a city, a new neighborhood, and some corn crops. its a form of environmental harm when these animals become scrawny and displaced due to overfarming, and that's been sickening the earth for decades.

close to today in 2012, 915 million acres of the US was farmland and 80% has always been dedicated to the animals as a grazing ground. "'Seven football fields’ worth of land is bulldozed every minute to create more room for farmed animals" according to the smithsonian institution.

the imbalance is quite obvious. if my previous conclusion was that purchasing meat does not mean you kept cows, chickens, and pigs to a certain number, then my secondary conclusion is that buying more meat than you need can shoot an insane bullet into nature as a whole, at every single animal. nothing is evenly kept by regular humans gathering products from the supermarket. it is evenly kept

by those who farm.

the only things i chose to mention were the environmental impacts of purchasing it because i don't really care about the whole point of "but x is better for you." if it's food you like, it's food you like. enjoy yourself and stay healthy and don't judge others for liking pork or tofu, it literally does not matter. i eat a little bit of meat here and there so im not even on one side. for anyone who eats meat and feels guilty rn, don't. especially if you have a medical problem, its all fine and understandable.

yet if it happens to terrify you, here are other solutions i wrote out that dont involve going vegetarian: only buy what you actually need to eat, don't waste any of it (maybe feed the bone to your dog if the chicken wasn't seasoned or use chicken broth later for dumplings?) even consider buying meat from hunters instead of industrial farms, buying fish too, ordering less meat at a restaurant than normal some days, and being an activist against deforestation by planting trees somewhere else, whatever works but there's no pressure to.

disclaimer: this response was created to inform and not to be used for one side to claim they are better. personally do what you want. diet isnt really a fight like i mean, im gonna chug a faygo in 20 minutes, seriously. and also this information isnt necesarily pro-vegan, it just comes across that way because all it is is a response to someone who was a little misinformed who happened to be a meat eater. i went off af for the ending sorry. so duh calling them wrong sounds biased at first, but its not, because im explaining how the fact they used was wrong up until the second part which was meant to stretch out the innner workings and effects of the response.

again, whats in your throat is your business. everyone can get information mixed up sometimes and i just want to help with no malicious intent. also please comment if i got anything wrong. thank you for reading! i really just want to try to help but this might have been a bad idea, i dont know yet
Join Qfeast to read the entire story!
Sign In. It is absolutely free!
Please Rate:
5.0 out of 5 from 4 users
Be the first to add this story to favorites
▼Scroll down for more stories

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment