To go out on a limb a little bit, I believe that the most important ethical dilemma for consumers is beef versus legumes.

I could have phrased this more generally as meat versus plants, but beef and legumes, specifically, are at opposite extremes in terms of environmental and social impact.* They are also the most popular sources of protein in the animal and plant worlds, respectively. Legumes include peas, beans, peanuts, lentils, and products made from them, ranging from traditional tofu and soy milk to newer products from companies such as Ripple Foods and Beyond Meat.

I’ve spent the last few years researching and writing a book on ethical consumption (almost finished!) and this process has only increased my confidence that following a plant-based diet is the top action that we can take, as consumers, to reduce our footprint.** The simple decision to choose plants (such as legumes) over red meat (especially beef) has a huge positive impact in each of the following areas:  

• Climate change
• Tropical deforestation
• Pollution from agriculture (fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides)
• A decline in biodiversity
• Food security for the human population as it grows
• Freshwater use and water security

Several of these are impacts are compounding – i.e., they have a kind of synergy that speeds up our journey to a very bad place. Deforestation accelerates climate change, which in turn reduces crop yields, which will reduce food security, increasing famine.

It’s actually pretty good news, when you consider it, that many of our most pressing global problems are addressable via a lifestyle change that’s easily achievable. Making that substitute is totally doable for almost everyone, with the rest of our diet ranging from fully plant-based to the inclusion of some animal products.

Yes, it is great to have this solution, except that there’s a war raging over this simple consumer dilemma.

In this post, I’ll outline some of the strategies and battles in this war.

*A shout-out to other foods that are very low impact. Check out this post on the sustainability of seaweed to learn about how increasing our consumption of responsibly-grown seaweed is another key solution to all of the problems listed above.

**I’ll cover some of the other top actions in future posts – the second one deals with social impacts not covered above.

The war over red meat vs legumes

While there’s widespread recognition that transitioning to plant-based food is paramount, several groups are working hard to halt this transition. Of course this includes the meat and dairy industries, but other groups too – governments, right-wing groups, the National Rifle Association (NRA), and even the pharmaceutical industry. I’ll get back to that last one in a future post. But first, how is this war playing out? Here’s a summary of some of the battles:

Government-backed advertising campaigns for meat and dairy

Americans have grown up with ad campaigns such as Got Milk? and Beef. It’s what’s for dinner. Many of these ads are actually funded by councils administered by US government or state agencies such as the California Department of Food and Agriculture or the US Dept. of Agriculture (USDA). When was the last time you’ve seen an ad for legumes?

Things have become even more one-sided as the industry groups specifically target competition from plant-based foods. A recent ad for dairy milk featured actress Aubrey Plaza comparing “real milk” to milk made from wood, the latter representing the plant-based milk competition. A complaint was filed to the USDA, stating that the ad violates a federal law prohibiting USDA-backed ads from disparaging other agricultural commodities. But that’s only scratching the surface of the extent to which governments support the meat industry, excluding the plant-based competition.

Funding and government funding disparities

Not surprisingly, the meat industry has worked hard to gain as much influence as possible over governments and other regulating/funding bodies. The disparity in assistance to plant-based foods versus meat was examined in a paper published by Stanford scientists, last year. By looking at the hard numbers on funding for R&D as well as money spent on lobbying, the authors found strong evidence to support their hypotheses:

Our main hypothesis is that governments are de facto hindering the diffusion of animal product analogs through a policy mix that preserves the dominance of animal farming systems. Our second hypothesis is that the incumbent [animal farming] industry is playing an active role in obstructing a sustainability transition of the food system through political influence.

They found that almost 100% of public funding went to the further development of animal farming, with only a tiny percentage going to projects (from small businesses or universities) related to plant-based food.

Public funding for the novel [plant-based] technologies is smaller than that for animal products by factors of 1,200 in the EU and 800 in the US. Compared to the animal product sector, the spending by trade and non-profit organizations in lobbying activities for the [plant-based] sector is smaller by factors of 3 (EU) and 190 (US)

The authors also discussed other government-backed programs that have further tilted the playing field, such as pushing dairy in schools, banning the term milk on plant-based products, and refusing to include sustainability info on dietary guidelines (Nordic countries did start doing this in 2020).

Note that the current US administration recently announced $110 million in funding to the meat industry, mainly for the opening of new slaughterhouses.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) strategies

A Guardian article from last year examined tactics used by the beef industry including the sinister Digital Command Center (staffed 24/7 to quash any beef criticism) and the preposterous Masters of Beef Advocacy (MBA) program.

I am one of more than 21,000 graduates of a free, by-admission-only, online training course created by the US beef industry called the Masters of Beef Advocacy (MBA) program. The course is the creation of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the beef industry’s main lobby group, and on completing it I can tell you that you don’t actually get a master’s degree, despite its name.

What you get is multiple misleading – but scientific sounding – narratives about beef industry sustainability and repeated appeals for students to engage proactively with consumers online and offline about environmental topics. Via a private Facebook group for graduates, the NCBA also distributes infographics and industry talking points to deploy in online conversations.

In the training video, NCBA leaders cited data that found 47% of Americans aren’t sure about the sustainability of beef. That persuadable middle is a top priority for the industry, they said, as whoever reaches them best has the power to sway the balance of public opinion.

Diet campaigns such as the Paleo Diet

Loren Cordain had previously received modest funding from the NRA to examine the health benefits of game meats. But he hit the big time with The Paleo Diet, becoming a featured speaker at beef industry (NCBA) events and launching an empire. Diets such as Paleo, no matter how scientifically unsound the premise, can be fantastic promotional vehicles for meat. For a discussion on this topic, I’ll refer you to my post on The Paleo Diet: science, health, and sustainability.

The Paleo Diet is especially relevant to the legumes versus beef debate as Cordain went out of his way to ban legumes from the diet.

Prohibition of legumes by the Paleo Diet

This is where it really becomes apparent that there’s an agenda behind the Paleo Diet. The book’s author, Loren Cordain, repeatedly states that legumes are not allowed in the Paleo Diet. Is it related to the fact that legumes are the main alternative to meat as a source of dietary protein? Is the book more about an excuse to eat meat than any serious examination of the diet of the Paleolithic people, who rarely lived beyond the age of 40? Curiously, wine is allowed in the Paleo Diet, coinciding with Cordain’s prior funding from The Wine Institute.

I’ve examined every argument for why legumes are banned by the Paleo Diet and found that none of them hold up to scrutiny.

Specific campaign to discredit tofu and soy products

You may remember many stories casting doubt on soy and products made from soy, such as tofu, linking them to Amazon deforestation. Actually, beef is by far and away the largest driver of deforestation in the Amazon. Even the soy that’s grown on deforested land is largely used for animal feed. Here are some specific numbers (from my book!) on that:

One of the genuine concerns about tofu is that soy farming can result in deforestation in Brazil. Several articles reporting on this issue neglected to put the situation in perspective. First, cattle ranching has been responsible for most of the deforestation in the Amazon, with soy contributing only 1.5%. Second, 70-90% of the soy grown worldwide is used to feed animals raised for food, and only around 2.5% is used to make tofu. Third, the Soy Moratorium, introduced in 2006 following a Greenpeace report on the impact of soy commodity trading on the Amazon rainforest, has been very successful in curbing deforestation for soy. Fourth, compared to tracing the origin of animal feed used for meat production, it’s relatively easy to source tofu that’s deforestation-free.

There were other campaigns to dissuade consumers from buying soy products, from a health perspective. However, like the arguments against legumes in the Paleo Diet, they were scientifically unsound.

Ultra-processed food

Perhaps you look at the examples above and think you are immune to all of this propaganda. Well, it’s great if you can maintain a healthy skepticism on these assaults, but it’s hard not to be influenced by the group with by far the bigger budgets (and political influence). Consider the latest tactic that has been co-opted by the meat and dairy industry: the discussion on ultra-processed food? I’ll deal with it in the next post. 

Apologies to regular readers for revisiting some familiar material in this topic, but it’s important enough that I don’t mind repeating myself a little bit.

---

If you’re interested in ethical consumption, climate change, food sustainability, and plant-based food, pop on over to my other blog, Ethical Bargains.