• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Tax on red meat and bacon??

Their first two and most important studies in the introduction they reference are [1] and [2]. It turns out that [1] is one that they wrote previously so they plagiarised themselves. There are also other Oxford Uni docs in the references. So much for Academic Independence. I think one of the EU references is that symposium where it was led by a renowned Vegan Professor from Boston, as we discussed in another thread.
 
Note to self: No harm in stocking up on red meat, bacon and charcuterie. Best get more butter too just in case they aim for all animal products. There, job's a goodun'.
 
zand said:
What's so funny is these guys are supposed to be intelligent....
Click to expand...

They are students. Their brains haven't fully developed yet.

It is nothing to do with the Government. It is purely something suggested by the university gang that prepared the paper. (probably the vegan society members) I find it highly unlikely any government would implement it.
 
We can but hope.. all the MP's need their steak dinners I guess...
 
What is a vegaquarian? I'm guessing that it is a vegetarian that eats seafood, so not a vegetarian at all.
Flexitarian was a new one on me, too. If you eat the flesh of animals then in my opinion you cannot call yourself a vegi.
 
This is an academic paper, not a government proposal. Veganism is not being advocated:-

As a result, processed meat consumption would decrease by about one serving per week (12 g/d) in high-income countries and less than a third of a serving per week (4 g/d) in upper middle-income countries. As consumers are projected to partially switch from processed meat to unprocessed meat and other substitutes such as poultry, red meat consumption would remain largely unchanged in those regions despite its increase price.
​
The authors also include the following caveat:-

Both our health estimates and our emissions estimates would change depending on the food groups that would compensate for the reductions in processed meat consumption. For example, greater consumption of sugar and refined carbohydrates, something that is associated with negative health impacts [51], could compensate some of the health benefits associated with lower consumption of processed meat. ​
 
I can understand the possibility that processed meats and fish may be carcinogenic, simply because of modern methods of presevation to extend supermarket shelf life. The use of nitrites in particular are suspect, seeing what they do when used in weedkillers such as Roundup that attracted such adverse notices. I now avoid kippers for this reason - they are nothing like the ones I used to eat in my youth that came 'fresh' from the fishmonger. Anything 'smoked' nowadays are chemically fabricated including cheeses.
 
erm

"On the other hand, replacement of red and processed meat with legumes, fruits and vegetables, or whole grains could lead to additional health benefits without significantly affecting the emissions reductions identified here"
 
Guzzler said:
What is a vegaquarian? I'm guessing that it is a vegetarian that eats seafood, so not a vegetarian at all.
Click to expand...
Most people call it pescatarian but I think vegaquarian is more fun
I don't say I am a veggie because I also eat fish.

I do not eat meat. This was a ethical decision I made 25 years ago when it was very difficult to get free range meat and I haven't missed it since. It has never been a health-based decision.
 
bulkbiker said:
erm

"On the other hand, replacement of red and processed meat with legumes, fruits and vegetables, or whole grains could lead to additional health benefits without significantly affecting the emissions reductions identified here"
Click to expand...
Remember that the researchers are talking about replacing one portion of red or processed meat per week in high income countries. Even if you replace that one portioin with fruit and veg, it doesn't make you a vegan.
 

I looked up the prices of free range/pasture fed meat locally. I almost spilled my cuppa!
 
Both are important
The genetics of disease are important in terms of the relative vulnerability to develop a particular disease. Individuals with a high heritability for a particular disease will Be more likely to develop the disease than will another individual with a lower genetic vulnerabilty in the same circumstances
Epigenetics and the science of gene expression are important in understanding how/if that genetically mediated vulnerability is activated or not.
 
Without my Diabetes perspective I dont think the Goverment should try make us eat what they think is right, advise they can. I like meat, fish and vegetables and I make my own choices about ratios and quality and thats how it should be. Equally those who choose Vegan, vegetarian, vegaquarian, etc should do just that...choose! Nobody has the right to disrespect peoples choices and that includes politicians IMO...but what do I know?
 
Dark Horse said:
Remember that the researchers are talking about replacing one portion of red or processed meat per week in high income countries. Even if you replace that one portioin with fruit and veg, it doesn't make you a vegan.
Click to expand...
Possibly but we should also remember that the lead researcher is an outspoken vegan so the paper is written from that perspective and he references his own papers 2 or 3 times in the new piece. I'm afraid I can see where he is coming from only too well.
 

You are, in essence, right but look what happened with rates of smoking. We were given all the advice and knowledge and numbers fell but the decrease was sharper as the tax on ciggies was hiked.
 
Guzzler said:
You are, in essence, right but look what happened with rates of smoking. We were given all the advice and knowledge and numbers fell but the decrease was sharper as the tax on ciggies was hiked.
Click to expand...
I think the sharper decrease coincided with banning places one could smoke, and public disapproval of inflicting smoke on others.
 
Dark Horse said:
Remember that the researchers are talking about replacing one portion of red or processed meat per week in high income countries. Even if you replace that one portioin with fruit and veg, it doesn't make you a vegan.
Click to expand...
I have already replaced at least one portion of meat a week simply by becoming diabetic.
 
it just another way of taxing us, in the guise of being for our health.

there is a huge pro-vegan thing going on as people are realizing this planet cant sustain us all, let alone the future increase in population.

However, we cant feed all the people on vegan stuff either. Much land is not suitable for agriculture, and where will the manure/fertilizer come from? etc etc etc. no joined up thinking going on here.
 
lucylocket61 said:
I think the sharper decrease coincided with banning places one could smoke, and public disapproval of inflicting smoke on others.
Click to expand...

It was indeed a multipronged initiative but most of the people I have spoken to have said that they had to give up because they just couldn't afford it any more. No one has said they gave up because they had to go outdoors to do it and some are now complaining that even though they vape outdoors they are experiencing kick backs. But let's get back to red meat and it's supposed ill affect on us and the rumour that extra taxes may be added.
 
Are there no farmers with Diabetes on this site to give us their perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…