And yet they "failed miserably at 'vocalizing'" the policies. Uh huh.

It's a good point. And certainly a lot are resistant to any oversight or regulation. But I find right-leaning people are actually very quick to obey and are generally pretty compliant, for all the bluster. They are fearful people.

But also there is a strong incentive to ensure food you grow is not going to kill your customers or get you sued. But this only really works when it's you as an individual. As soon as you are a corporation...

The amount of manure produced by a meat industry of a scale needed to feed billions of omnivorous humans is massively excessive to any possible needs in terms of crop fertilizer.

This is true.

Edit to be more clear and add some nuance because re-reading everything I can see how you interpreted my comment the way you did.

The context was essentially replacing animal feed with human food, in whole or in part. I did say "less animal production" but to try to be clear - I am completely discounting industrialized production and CAFOs. I do not consider them legitimate methods. That is really the source of your pollution and excess. I didn't specify this and I should have.

We can argue that there is some large reduction in animal production where we can find a balance but the debate is always one or the other and dominated by militant vegans who want fresh veggies and NO animal production. Currently that's not possible.

But another issue that relates to CAFOs is that so much of the manure is not available for composting. We're not set up for that because there are so many fewer organic operations. So if you reduce animal production across the board without regard to type of operation we absolutely will see a fertility deficit.

Uh oh you violated the cardinal rule of Lemmy and posted an opinion at odds with the intent of the OP.

I agree raw milk is delicious. Too bad most people cannot experience that safely.

Moo moo! Moo!

Imagine deliberately paying a premium for food that can make you seriously ill.

This applies to maybe 80% of what's in a grocery store.

First up, the principal is sound - meat production is very inefficient even if meat consumption is "efficient" just from the narrow perspective of getting adequate protein quickly and conveniently.

If demand for meat decreased then there’d be more food in the supply chain for humans.

1. We don't actually have a food production problem, we have a food distribution problem. Ie we do not need to produce -more- food.
2. Much of what's grown for animals is not readily edible by humans, corn being the big one - it's not corn you or I would want to eat.
3. One of the problems that's literally never mentioned is that growing produce for humans can either depend on artificial fertilizers from fossil fuels or natural fertilizer from animals. Less animal production for meat, while a very good idea on so many levels, presents a generalized fertility problem.

I don't really have any answers for #3.... just bringing it up as something to consider.

How cute. You think people on the whole care about policies and are very studious in examining them when considering candidates?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

I greatly enjoy eating vegans. Very lean and easy to catch.

I heard bleach works good too.

You are right, I missed that.

And that's so much worse.

Considering farms are pretty much exclusively in rural areas and how rural areas generally lean politically, it’s a testament to the human immune system that food poisoning deaths aren’t more widespread

It may be helpful to read up on food-borne illnesses and their vectors. I say this because what I interpret from your comment is that rural areas are "dirty" and that right-leaning areas are somehow "dirtier" by virtue of being lax in food safety.

Strictly speaking this isn't the way it works and it's important to understand how contamination occurs. Almost all pathogens end up in food in two ways: field hands with inadequate sanitation and contamination through handling, processing, and packaging. The vast majority of these cases occur when food supply chains are long and complex and when safety is compromised in the name of profit. For example cutting corners in poultry handling or paying farm workers by the unit rather than by time, such that they are strongly incentivized to urinate or defecate in the field.

Food production regulations are actually quite stringent further along the supply chain (See the Food Safety Modernization Act and Produce Safety Rule) but there are gaps (this is an ag joke) on the production side, particularly in enforcement.

Your best bet is to seek to shorten the supply chain for the food you buy. Avoid processed foods and buy as close to the source as you can. Favoring organically-grown produce direct from a farmer just about guarantees that your food is safe. For example, organic regulations through the National Organic Program require a long period of time between use of manure and harvesting to ensure pathogens break down. It's a common misconception that poop is used directly on growing crops.

Some reading:

USDA food borne illness guide: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/foodborne-illness-and-disease FSMA Final Rule on Produce Safety: https://www.fda.gov/food/food-safety-modernization-act-fsma/fsma-final-rule-produce-safety

Did you need someone to google that policy for you?

Or we could just use the 70% of farm land to feed us instead of the animals that make up 10-20% of a diet.

Have you worked out how that food will be grown?

Filthy farming practices don’t help.

No they don't. And that applies universally.

Are you German? Please tell me you are German.

And I'm sure insulting the people you'd like to do better at changing the situation is definitely going to help with your annoyance.

I mean seriously, this is a bit like saying to a trans person like me that while you are annoyed at the transphobia that kills people it's really my fault for not "doing something" about it.

WTF man.

Well I guess we should just throw up our hands and declare defeat then.

most of the groceries the SO and I buy end up going bad before we can use all of the ingredients.

So what you mean to say that for YOU it's cheaper to eat out given your current eating and cooking habits. But you are generalizing this for everyone. There are lots of reasons buying groceries and cooking may not be working for you. If you really want to save money, there is absolutely no question that it's cheaper than paying someone to cook for you every meal. Just because you haven't figured out how to do that doesn't mean you can say that's universally true.

This said, it sounds like eating out all the time is working for you and you are happy with it.

So this may not apply to you, but... If you do want to optimize for cost, I'd suggest:

1. Don't buy cheap ingredients. Discounted groceries are old groceries. Buy from a farmer's market if you can as things are WAY fresher and will last much longer.
2. Work out a small set of meals that you can put on repeat, last long and/or freeze well. Make these in quantities for several meals.
3. Buy as your base ingredients things that aren't perishable or can be frozen easily. Dried beans are an obvious example.
4. Pool food resources with friends.

Pro tip: the coherent policy does still exist even if you don't bother to look it up. It's not like trees falling in the forest or something.

I thought T stood for Terrorist?