Rule 6: Beef is by far the most environmentally costly food most people can put on their plate, which is why choosing it over alternatives is such a telling signal. Per gram of protein, beef produces many times the greenhouse gas emissions of chicken, eggs, or legumes, mostly from cattle methane and from the forest cleared for pasture and feed. It also demands far more land and water than almost any other common food. These facts are widely published and easy to find, and cheaper, lower-impact options are available in nearly every grocery store. So when someone keeps choosing beef anyway, they are showing that the environmental cost isn’t a factor in their decision. Nobody has to be perfect, but picking the highest-impact option when better ones are easy to reach is a pretty clear statement of priorities.
It’s also worst health-wise compared to other common meat types.
Oh? How does that work?
Are you asking why is red meat bad for you?
Edit: in case you are, red meat intake increases the risk of heart disease, some cancers and diabetes.
Other red meats include pork and lamb too and most other mammal meat.
Not saying there aren’t some health benefits too but minimising your red meat intake and supplementing your diet with more legumes and tofu as well as white meats (poultry and fish), is a healthier option.
Nyet. I’m asking about the mechanisms / science of the adverse differences between beef & other meats.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590157525010582
Good starting point
If I understand correctly, the article is a summary of existing research, and suggests that red meat is generally worse than white, but doesn’t single out beef, specifically.
This is something that’s been pretty well-established for… I don’t know, a decade or two?
I didn’t know pork was red meat, that’s disappointing