The problem is that’s an elitist and exclusionary take.
Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.
As they scale up, the costs will be lower. It’s a supply chain thing, not a fundamental limitation. The input costs are lower. In the broader sense, plant-based diets from whole-foods are actually already cheaper
It found that in high-income countries:
• Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.
• Vegetarian diets were a close second.
• Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.
• By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.
Based on primary data (n = 1040) collected through an online survey, representative of the Portuguese population, through logistic regressions, it was possible to conclude that plant-based consumers, particularly vegan, are associated with lower food expenditures compared to omnivorous consumers. In fact, plant-based consumers are shown to spend less than all other consumers assessed
EDIT: I should also note that in an increasing list of countries, non-whole plant-based things like this are already cheaper too. With meat prices rising further, that’s only likely to increase more
But most countries are underdeveloped, or in ways of development, and there it’s not really viable now.
Also, take into account this. The scalability IS a fundamental issue because the quantity, quality and speed of production needed to feed the global population are not compatible with the limited space, resources and the physics, chemistry and biology of soils. You will cause massive soil losses due to the mere fact that such soils will be above their limits.
There’s also enviromental and echological issues, such as the point that you’ll be displacing many native species (both from plants and animals) to be able to grow others that are edible to us, massively altering ecosystems. If with the scale of plant production that we now have that’s a serious problem, imagine with such a drastic increase. We wouldn’t give enough.
Moreover, think on the issues of transport: not all plants are able to grow in every country, and as such you’ll have to move a massive amount of these around the globe, boosting the carbon footprints of global transport.
And then we have all the hydric issues, and all the issues with fertilizers and insecticides.
And it could go on, but it would never end.
I have to look better at these studies, tho, I’ll do it later because nevertheless it looks like there are interesting advances I haven’t heard of before, and that makes me a bit excited because anything that can help both humanity and animals is good.
The problem is that’s an elitist and exclusionary take.
Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.
As they scale up, the costs will be lower. It’s a supply chain thing, not a fundamental limitation. The input costs are lower. In the broader sense, plant-based diets from whole-foods are actually already cheaper
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study
This is also true in real spending data
https://agrifoodecon.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40100-022-00224-9
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800915301488?via=ihub (looking at the US)
EDIT: I should also note that in an increasing list of countries, non-whole plant-based things like this are already cheaper too. With meat prices rising further, that’s only likely to increase more
Yeah, I understad that.
But most countries are underdeveloped, or in ways of development, and there it’s not really viable now.
Also, take into account this. The scalability IS a fundamental issue because the quantity, quality and speed of production needed to feed the global population are not compatible with the limited space, resources and the physics, chemistry and biology of soils. You will cause massive soil losses due to the mere fact that such soils will be above their limits.
There’s also enviromental and echological issues, such as the point that you’ll be displacing many native species (both from plants and animals) to be able to grow others that are edible to us, massively altering ecosystems. If with the scale of plant production that we now have that’s a serious problem, imagine with such a drastic increase. We wouldn’t give enough.
Moreover, think on the issues of transport: not all plants are able to grow in every country, and as such you’ll have to move a massive amount of these around the globe, boosting the carbon footprints of global transport.
And then we have all the hydric issues, and all the issues with fertilizers and insecticides.
And it could go on, but it would never end.
I have to look better at these studies, tho, I’ll do it later because nevertheless it looks like there are interesting advances I haven’t heard of before, and that makes me a bit excited because anything that can help both humanity and animals is good.