Beefs with ‘Beef’
“If I ever desire to eat meat, I will do so because there is no reason not to do so,” said Nicolette Hahn Niman in last week’s story about her book Defending Beef (“Eat More Beef,” Oct. 22). And yet there remains an undeniable reason not to eat meat, and that is the colossal cruelty inherent in the meat industry. I would have hoped this longtime vegetarian would not sell short her “affinity for animals” because, outside of some of our precious Sonoma and Marin ranches, and maybe a few others scattered here and there, every single one of the animals raised for food suffers a life of misery and brutality. That is reason enough to eschew eating meat.
Although methane emissions are indeed lower than CO2, the EPA graphs only measure quantities of emissions. The Bohemian article didn’t mention anything about rather recent IPCC studies on how methane’s chemistry may have a greater impact on radiative forcing. Maybe Hahn Niman’s book does. But methane may have potential to “have 34 times the effect on temperature of a carbon dioxide emission of the same mass over the following 100 years.” I must add I sincerely appreciate the efforts of grass-fed free-range beef operations as a step in a noble direction.
Editor’s note: ‘Defending Beef’ does discuss the impact methane emissions. Space didn’t allow inclusion of this issue into the article.
Sad, sensationalist piece that panders to the meat-loving crowd. What exactly qualifies this lady to call out a mass of scientifically published journals/reports as “flimsy science”? If this is the route the Bohemian is going to take with such an impending issue, please cite sources. Even the text used at the [SRJC’s] introductory class for environmental science states that the best way to lessen your carbon footprint is to adopt a plant-based diet.
This makes no sense, her reasons . . . It is absurd and she is harming living beings that feel pain for her own desires and then justifying it. She should watch the documentary Cowspiracy.
Nothing sensational at all—the author cites scientific reports to debunk all the myths that are being passed off as “science.” maybe you should read the books as well their footnotes before making such ill-informed comments. Besides, any introductory environmental course that doesn’t understand the carbon cycle, ecosystems and soil health really isn’t a very good one. Diets that require a lot of transportation for out-of-season produce don’t have small carbon footprints.
U.S., state and municipal health authorities are working overtime and spending millions of dollars to stem the spread of ebola, which has killed just one person here.
Where is the comparable effort to stem the spread of heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes and other chronic diseases that kill 1.4 million Americans annually and are linked conclusively to excessive consumption of animal products? According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, that’s 23 times the number killed by all infectious diseases combined, including AIDS, hepatitis, blood poisoning and intestinal infections!
Yet each of us can take personal responsibility for our own health by reducing then dropping animal products from our menu.
I know and work with Rami Batarseh and Vicky Kumpfer. From the beginning, they have worked creatively with the long-term local art community. I am very concerned with the negativity of this article (“Making a Scene,” Oct. 8). I am in dialogue with Rami about this.
Flora Tsapovsky has misrepresented what Batarseh and Kumpfer said and meant. She presents the Fulton Crossing gallery’s attitude as outrageously disdainful and disrespecting of “typical local artists.” Her intent seems to be build a controversy at the expense of the gallery’s reputation. Sabotage!
What can the Bohemian do to repair the damage done by Tsapovsky to Fulton Crossing’s reputation? What was intended as positive publicity for Batarseh and Kumpfer’s efforts at building an artistic asset within our community has instead been written as an exposé of sinister snobbery toward local older artists.
I appreciate your attention to this and to finding a way to promote good will.
Flora Tsapovsky responds: I sat down with Fulton Crossing’s team to talk about Sonoma County art and its prospects. The result was a critical discussion that put the local art community in a larger context .The local art community deserves an honest, in-depth evaluation, which, in my opinion, is the very opposite of disrespect.
Write to us at [email protected].