Beef banned in Maharashtra, 5 yrs jail, Rs 10,000 fine for possession or sale

[Screambowl]

Thanks, but anything where I dont have to subscribe or pay for ?

.

You wanted some theory on red meat. I gave you the links

 

[Raul_AD]

Health & Environmental Implications of U.S. Meat Consumption & Production - Meatless Monday - Projects - Center for a Livable Future - Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Health & Environmental Implications of U.S. Meat Consumption & Production

• Technical Assistance to Meatless Monday
• Background and CLF’s Evolving Role
• Meat Consumption & Public Health Resources
  Meat Consumption: Trends and Health Implications
  Meat consumption in the United States has nearly doubled in the last century. Americans are now among the top per capita meat consumers in the world; the average American eats more than three times the global average.1 A growing body of evidence suggests Americans’ taste for meat and animal products is putting them at greater risk for a range of health problems.
  
  • While per capita poultry consumption has increased, the majority of meat consumed is still red meat (beef, pork, lamb), and nearly a quarter is processed meat (hot dogs, bacon, sausages, deli meats, etc.).2
  • Meat can be a good source of protein and other essential nutrients, but most Americans eat more than 1.5 times the average daily protein requirement,3, and consume more than the recommended amount of foods from the USDA Protein Foods group.4
  • The majority of the protein foods consumed in the U.S. are meat and animal products, which are often high in saturated fat and cholesterol, as opposed to the more nutrient-dense and health-promoting plant-based options (e.g., beans, peas, lentils, soy products, nuts and seeds).4 Typical American diets also fall significantly short of meeting recommendations for vegetables, fruits, and whole grains.5
  • A strong body of scientific evidence links excess meat consumption, particularly of red and processed meat, with heart disease,6,7,8 stroke,9 type 2 diabetes,6,10 obesity,11,12 certain cancers, 7,13,14,15,16 and earlier death.7,8 Diets high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans can help prevent these diseases and promote health in a variety of ways.17,18,19,20,21
  • Why does meat increase health risks? Studies give several reasons: high saturated fat and cholesterol content,6 high energy density,11,21 carcinogenic compounds found in processed meat and formed during high-temperature cooking,8,22 a compound called L-carnitine in red meat that may promote plaque build-up in the arteries,23 and the lack of health-protective plant foods in high-meat diets.
  • While there is no specific federal guidance on the type or amount of daily meat consumption, key recommendations in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines include choosing a variety of protein foods, increasing the amount and variety of seafood consumed, reducing saturated fat intake, and increasing fruit and vegetable intake.5 Americans have sufficient flexibility in their diets to reduce meat consumption while making space for nutrient-rich, plant-based alternatives.
  Meat Production: Public Health Concerns, from Farm to Fork
  Almost all of the meat, dairy products, and eggs produced in the United States come from industrial food animal production (IFAP) operations that confine thousands of cattle, tens of thousands of pigs, or as many as hundreds of thousands of chickens at a single facility —and produce enormous amounts of animal waste. IFAP raises serious public health concerns for industry workers, rural communities, consumers of animal products, and the general public.
  
  • Feed additives: The feed given to industrially-raised cattle, hogs, and poultry is specially formulated to maximize production at the lowest possible cost. These feeds may contain antibiotics, arsenical drugs, rendered animal carcasses, and other ingredients that may lead to the introduction of harmful contaminants into our food supply.1,2
  • Antibiotic resistance: Antibiotic drugs have been called the “health care miracle of the last 500 years.” IFAP practices are eroding the effectiveness of these life-saving drugs: The routine use of low doses of antibiotics in feed contributes to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.3,4 Antibiotic-resistant infections in humans are more expensive and difficult to treat.5
  • Worker health: Workers in IFAP operations may face numerous hazards, including toxic gases from animal waste,6 and crowded, unsanitary conditions ripe for the transmission of diseases from animals to workers, who might then spread infections to their communities.7 Processing plant workers are often required to use sharp tools and heavy machinery, at high speeds and under hazardous conditions. Workers are at high risk for antibiotic-resistant infections, particularly if they incur cuts or scrapes.8,9 In many cases, workers lack the means to demand safer conditions.
  • Animal welfare: Animals raised in IFAP operations may be subjected to overcrowding, confined conditions that severely restrict movement, bodily alterations without pain relief, jolting during transport, feed deprivation, early weaning, and other physical and emotional harms.10 Practices that induce stress can increase animals’ transmission of disease11 — a concern for both human and animal health.
    
  • Novel influenza: Frequent contact among large populations of hogs, birds, and humans — such as where industrial hog and poultry operations are sited in close proximity — offer ideal conditions for the generation of new influenza viruses.12,13 The influenza pandemic of 1918, responsible for more deaths than any other outbreak in human history, illustrates the potential implications of novel influenza.
    
  • Animal waste: Manure is a valuable resource for promoting soil fertility, but the volume of waste generated by IFAP operations often overwhelms the capacity of nearby cropland to absorb it, leaving the excess to contaminate drinking water and waterways. As a result, downstream communities may be exposed to a range of groundwater contaminants, including nitrates, disease-causing organisms, and heavy metals.14 Nutrient runoff from animal waste and other sources has also been linked to the growth of toxic microorganisms in recreational waters.15 Concerns over toxic human exposure have prompted numerous closings of beaches and commercial fishing areas.16
  • Rural communities: People living near or downstream from IFAP operations may be forced to cope with the health and social impacts of contaminated air and water. Odors from nearby operations are more than just unpleasant smells; they have been associated with high blood pressure, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, and other harms. These and other impacts contribute to the social and economic decline of our nation’s rural communities. 6, 17
    
  • Health disparities: In many cases, the burden of public health harms arising from IFAP falls disproportionately upon low-income communities and communities of color — populations already affected by poorer health status and lack of access to medical care.6
    
  • Foodborne illness: Disease-causing microorganisms originating in IFAP operations, including antibiotic-resistant pathogens, can enter our food supply at various points. When animal waste contaminates water sources, for example, contaminants can be transferred to plant surfaces when crops are irrigated.18 The scale and speed of meat processing plants also present frequent opportunities for widespread contamination.
  Meat Production: Global and Ecological Concerns
  Industrial food animal production (IFAP) contributes to ecological harms that affect our land, air, and water. Raising animals for food also has implications for global climate change, and our capacity to feed a growing global population.
  
  • Animal waste: Waste from IFAP operations can pollute waterways, contributing to “dead zones” that are devoid of most aquatic life. Manure spills from swine operations have also been implicated in outbreaks of toxic microorganisms that resulted in massive fish kills.1
    
  • Water use: Growing crops for animal feed entails a highly inefficient use of water, and places a strain on diminishing freshwater reserves. By some estimates, between 1,6002 and 2,5003 gallons of water are needed to produce one pound of feedlot beef. Globally, an estimated 27 percent of the water “footprint” of humanity is attributable to meat and dairy production.4
    
  • Climate change: Animal agriculture generates a significant amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change, and the increased frequency and severity of flooding, droughts, and other weather events expected to follow.5 The production, processing, distribution and retailing of animal products in the United States accounts for an estimated 9 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions6,7; worldwide estimates are closer to 15 percent.8 Major sources of emissions include cattle belching, animal manure, and synthetic fertilizers used to grow feed crops.7
    
  • Land use: Contrary to claims that IFAP is efficient, the vast majority of calories and protein in feed crops are lost when they are converted to animal products.9 Beef production is particularly inefficient; per unit of meat, cattle consume on average three times as many calories from feed compared to hogs and poultry.
    
  • Global food security: By some estimates, global food production would need to double by 2050 if we expect to feed the growing population. The prospect of attaining this goal is severely limited by the amount of agricultural land devoted to raising animals for food. In North America, for example, only 40 percent of cropland is devoted to growing food for direct human consumption; the bulk of the remainder is devoted to feed crops.10

 

[Koovie]

Here is something more for you:

New study links L-carnitine in red meat to heart disease - Harvard Health Blog - Harvard Health Publications

New study links L-carnitine in red meat to heart disease
Posted April 17, 2013, 1:53 pm
Daniel Pendick, Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

Is red meat bad for your heart? A new study suggests it is, but not for the reasons you might expect.

There’s long been a perception—not necessarily backed by strong evidence—that eating steak, hamburger, lamb, and other red meat ups the risk of heart disease. The saturated fat and cholesterol they deliver have been cited as key culprits. A team from a half dozen U.S. medical centers says the offending ingredient is L-carnitine, a compound that is abundant in red meat.

According to this work, published online in the journal Nature Medicine, eating red meat delivers L-carnitine to bacteria that live in the human gut. These bacteria digest L-carnitine and turn it into a compound called trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO). In studies in mice, TMAO has been shown to cause atherosclerosis, the disease process that leads to cholesterol-clogged arteries. We know that clogged coronary arteries can lead to heart attacks.

So, case closed—don’t eat red meat? Sorry, nutritional science isn’t that simple.

“The studies of red meat and heart disease in humans are conflicting,” says Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, associate professor of medicine at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital. “This new research was well-done and compelling, but it’s too early to decide that this molecule, TMAO, causes atherosclerosis in humans or that this is responsible for some of the associations of meat intake and risk.”

Dr. Mozaffarian, a cardiologist and epidemiologist, studies the health effects of dietary habits and other lifestyle factors in large populations. His team has previously pooled the findings of the best studies available on red meat and health and found that people who eat unprocessed red meat regularly have, at worst, only a slightly higher risk of developing heart disease. Unprocessed red meat includes virtually all fresh cuts of beef, pork, lamb, and the like.

“If you look at people who eat unprocessed red meat, there is a relatively weak association with heart disease,” Dr. Mozaffarian says. “It’s not protective—and healthier dietary choices exist—but major harms are also not seen.”

In the bigger picture, we do have pretty damning evidence about the harms of eating a particular type of meat. “Processed red meats—bacon, sausage, salami, deli meats—are associated with much higher risk of heart disease,” Dr. Mozaffarian says.

Research at the Harvard School of Public Health has shown that people who eat the most processed meats have a higher overall risk of death. The ultimate reason for this is not yet clear, says Dr. Mozaffarian, but it may be the huge doses of sodium delivered by all those low-fat deli sandwiches and salami-festooned platters.

And here comes other spoilers against the L-carnitine study: Processed meats generally contain less L-carnitine than does fresh red meat. Heart-healthy fish and chicken also contain L-carnitine, Dr. Mozaffarian points out—although five to 10 times less of it than red meat. “TMAO needs to be studied more in humans to understand the implications for public health,” Dr. Mozaffarian says. “This new research is very interesting but is not yet the final word.”

To further complicate matters, a study published online today in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings suggests that supplements of L-carnitine may help heart attack survivors reduce the chances of dying prematurely or reduce symptoms of angina (chest pain with exertion or stress).

L-carnitine supplements: “Think three times before taking”
There’s still a long way to go before we know the full story about L-carnitine and heart disease. Even so, the Nature Medicine report is very important, Mozaffarian says. It suggests that regularly eating red meat boosts the number of L-carnitine-loving bacteria in your gut. “It’s the best demonstration so far of two-way communication between ourselves and the bacteria in out gut: what we eat affects the bacteria, and what they do with what we eat can influence health.”

“Based on the Nature Medicine study, I’d be concerned about taking L-carnitine supplements,” Dr. Mozaffarian says. “There was no strong reason to take such supplements before the study, and now this well-done study suggests there may be harm. I would definitely think three times before taking an L-carnitine supplement.” The studies in the Mayo report were mostly small with short follow-up, and included only heart attack survivors.

Of course, there are reasons to avoid eating red meat that aren’t directly related to individual health. Cattle farming has devastating environmental effects, including production of greenhouse gases, water pollution, and deforestation. “Health effects in humans aside, red meat consumption is clearly bad for the health of our planet,” says Mozaffarian.

How refreshing to see your discussing skills improving...

OT:

As the article says, this study is not conclusive (The backrounds of the testsubjects have not been mentioned at all ?):
“The studies of red meat and heart disease in humans are conflicting,” says Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, associate professor of medicine at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital. “This new research was well-done and compelling, but it’s too early to decide that this molecule, TMAO, causes atherosclerosis in humans or that this is responsible for some of the associations of meat intake and risk.”

Furthermore its the quality of food (again):
“If you look at people who eat unprocessed red meat, there is a relatively weak association with heart disease,”

BTW: Similarly inconclusive studies found out (very recently) that milk consumption leads to early death.
Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men: cohort studies | The BMJ

 

[Raul_AD]

Red meat may raise Alzheimer's risk Medical News Today

Red meat may raise Alzheimer's risk
Last updated: Sunday 25 August 2013 at 2am PST
Like1.9k
Alzheimer's / Dementia
Nutrition / Diet
Neurology / Neuroscience

add your opinion
email
MNT featured Academic journal

Eating too much red meat, which raises brain levels of iron, may heighten the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, researchers from the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA reported in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease.

As background information, the authors explained that iron can accelerate the damaging reactions of free radicals. Over time, iron builds up in brain gray matter regions and appears to contribute to the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease and other age-related illnesses.

Alzheimer's disease has been an exceptionally challenging enemy to defeat. Its number 1 risk factor is aging - something none of us can prevent.

Most scientists and specialists agree that Alzheimer's is caused by one of two proteins:

• Tau
• Beta-amyloid

As we get older, these two proteins either disrupt signaling between neurons or kill them off.

Team leader, Dr. George Bartzokis and colleagues believe there is a third likely cause of Alzheimer's - iron accumulation.

Professor Bartzokis and team compared the hippocampus and the thalamus using sophisticated brain-imaging high- and low-field strength MRI instruments. The hippocampus is a brain region that is damaged early on in Alzheimer's, while the thalamus is only affected during the late stages.



In early stage Alzheimer's, iron has built up in the hippocampus but not the thalamus
The MRI scans showed that iron builds up over time in the hippocampus but not the thalamus. They also saw an association between iron accumulation levels in the hippocampus and tissue damage in that area.

Most scientists concentrate on the accumulation of beta-amyloid or tau that cause the hallmark plaques associated with Alzheimer's, Bartzokis explained.

For a long time, Bartzokis had been saying that the breakdown starts off much further "upstream".

Communication between neurons is disrupted when myelin, a fatty tissue that coats nerve fibers, is destroyed, promoting the accumulation of plaques. These amyloid plaques then destroy more myelin - a self-perpetuating cascade of destruction. The more the signaling is disrupted, the more the nerve cells die, and the classic signs of Alzheimer's appear.

Myelin is produced by oligodendrocytes. Oligodendrocytes are a type of brain cell. Bartzokis explained that oligodendrocytes, along with myelin, have the highest iron levels of any brain cells.

"Circumstantial evidence has long supported the possibility that brain iron levels might be a risk factor for age-related diseases like Alzheimer's," says Bartzokis.

Too much iron promotes oxidative damage
Iron is vital for cell function. However, too much of it encourages oxidative damage, something to which the brain is particularly susceptible.

Bartzokis and team set out to determine whether high tissue iron might cause the tissue breakdown associated with Alzheimer's. They focused on the hippocampus, an area of the brain that is involved in the formation of memories. They compared the hippocampus to the thalamus, which is relatively unaffected until the very late stages of the disease.

Their MRI technique was able to measure how much brain iron there was in a protein that stores iron - ferritin. The study included 31 Alzheimer's patients and 68 healthy individuals of the same age (controls).

Measuring iron in the brain is not easy if the patient has Alzheimer's, because the amount of water in the brain increases as the disease progresses. The more water there is in the brain, the harder it is to detect iron, Bartzokis explained.

Bartzokis said "It is difficult to measure iron in tissue when the tissue is already damaged. But the MRI technology we used in this study allowed us to determine that the increase in iron is occurring together with the tissue damage. We found that the amount of iron is increased in the hippocampus and is associated with tissue damage in patients with Alzheimer's but not in the healthy older individuals - or in the thalamus. So the results suggest that iron accumulation may indeed contribute to the cause of Alzheimer's disease."

The team added that the build up of iron in the brain could be the result of some modifying environmental factors, including how much red meat the person consumes, or their intake of iron dietary supplements. Another factor that can raise iron levels in the brain is having a hysterectomy before the menopause.

In an abstract in the journal, the authors concluded:

"The data shows that in AD, Hipp damage occurs in conjunction with ferritin iron accumulation. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate how increasing iron levels may influence the trajectory of tissue damage and cognitive and pathologic manifestations of AD."
Iron imbalance linked to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's
Researchers from Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, reported in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease (March 2013 issue) that an iron imbalance caused by prion proteins collecting in the brain is probably the cause of cell death in CJD (Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease).

The authors added that certain proteins found in the brains of patients with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's also regulate iron. They suggest that "neurotoxicity by the form of iron, called redox-active iron, may be a trait of neurodegenerative conditions in all three diseases."

Study leader, Neena Singh, said "There are many skeptics who think iron is a bystander or end-product of neuronal death and has no role to play in neurodegenerative conditions. We're not saying that iron imbalance is the only cause, but failure to maintain stable levels of iron in the brain appears to contribute significantly to neuronal death."

Written by Christian Nordqvist

 

[Screambowl]

Health & Environmental Implications of U.S. Meat Consumption & Production - Meatless Monday - Projects - Center for a Livable Future - Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Health & Environmental Implications of U.S. Meat Consumption & Production

• Technical Assistance to Meatless Monday
• Background and CLF’s Evolving Role
• Meat Consumption & Public Health Resources
  Meat Consumption: Trends and Health Implications
  Meat consumption in the United States has nearly doubled in the last century. Americans are now among the top per capita meat consumers in the world; the average American eats more than three times the global average.1 A growing body of evidence suggests Americans’ taste for meat and animal products is putting them at greater risk for a range of health problems.
  • While per capita poultry consumption has increased, the majority of meat consumed is still red meat (beef, pork, lamb), and nearly a quarter is processed meat (hot dogs, bacon, sausages, deli meats, etc.).2
  • Meat can be a good source of protein and other essential nutrients, but most Americans eat more than 1.5 times the average daily protein requirement,3, and consume more than the recommended amount of foods from the USDA Protein Foods group.4
  • The majority of the protein foods consumed in the U.S. are meat and animal products, which are often high in saturated fat and cholesterol, as opposed to the more nutrient-dense and health-promoting plant-based options (e.g., beans, peas, lentils, soy products, nuts and seeds).4 Typical American diets also fall significantly short of meeting recommendations for vegetables, fruits, and whole grains.5
  • A strong body of scientific evidence links excess meat consumption, particularly of red and processed meat, with heart disease,6,7,8 stroke,9 type 2 diabetes,6,10 obesity,11,12 certain cancers, 7,13,14,15,16 and earlier death.7,8 Diets high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans can help prevent these diseases and promote health in a variety of ways.17,18,19,20,21
  • Why does meat increase health risks? Studies give several reasons: high saturated fat and cholesterol content,6 high energy density,11,21 carcinogenic compounds found in processed meat and formed during high-temperature cooking,8,22 a compound called L-carnitine in red meat that may promote plaque build-up in the arteries,23 and the lack of health-protective plant foods in high-meat diets.
  • While there is no specific federal guidance on the type or amount of daily meat consumption, key recommendations in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines include choosing a variety of protein foods, increasing the amount and variety of seafood consumed, reducing saturated fat intake, and increasing fruit and vegetable intake.5 Americans have sufficient flexibility in their diets to reduce meat consumption while making space for nutrient-rich, plant-based alternatives.
  Meat Production: Public Health Concerns, from Farm to Fork
  Almost all of the meat, dairy products, and eggs produced in the United States come from industrial food animal production (IFAP) operations that confine thousands of cattle, tens of thousands of pigs, or as many as hundreds of thousands of chickens at a single facility —and produce enormous amounts of animal waste. IFAP raises serious public health concerns for industry workers, rural communities, consumers of animal products, and the general public.
  • Feed additives: The feed given to industrially-raised cattle, hogs, and poultry is specially formulated to maximize production at the lowest possible cost. These feeds may contain antibiotics, arsenical drugs, rendered animal carcasses, and other ingredients that may lead to the introduction of harmful contaminants into our food supply.1,2
  • Antibiotic resistance: Antibiotic drugs have been called the “health care miracle of the last 500 years.” IFAP practices are eroding the effectiveness of these life-saving drugs: The routine use of low doses of antibiotics in feed contributes to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.3,4 Antibiotic-resistant infections in humans are more expensive and difficult to treat.5
  • Worker health: Workers in IFAP operations may face numerous hazards, including toxic gases from animal waste,6 and crowded, unsanitary conditions ripe for the transmission of diseases from animals to workers, who might then spread infections to their communities.7 Processing plant workers are often required to use sharp tools and heavy machinery, at high speeds and under hazardous conditions. Workers are at high risk for antibiotic-resistant infections, particularly if they incur cuts or scrapes.8,9 In many cases, workers lack the means to demand safer conditions.
  • Animal welfare: Animals raised in IFAP operations may be subjected to overcrowding, confined conditions that severely restrict movement, bodily alterations without pain relief, jolting during transport, feed deprivation, early weaning, and other physical and emotional harms.10 Practices that induce stress can increase animals’ transmission of disease11 — a concern for both human and animal health.
    
  • Novel influenza: Frequent contact among large populations of hogs, birds, and humans — such as where industrial hog and poultry operations are sited in close proximity — offer ideal conditions for the generation of new influenza viruses.12,13 The influenza pandemic of 1918, responsible for more deaths than any other outbreak in human history, illustrates the potential implications of novel influenza.
    
  • Animal waste: Manure is a valuable resource for promoting soil fertility, but the volume of waste generated by IFAP operations often overwhelms the capacity of nearby cropland to absorb it, leaving the excess to contaminate drinking water and waterways. As a result, downstream communities may be exposed to a range of groundwater contaminants, including nitrates, disease-causing organisms, and heavy metals.14 Nutrient runoff from animal waste and other sources has also been linked to the growth of toxic microorganisms in recreational waters.15 Concerns over toxic human exposure have prompted numerous closings of beaches and commercial fishing areas.16
  • Rural communities: People living near or downstream from IFAP operations may be forced to cope with the health and social impacts of contaminated air and water. Odors from nearby operations are more than just unpleasant smells; they have been associated with high blood pressure, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, and other harms. These and other impacts contribute to the social and economic decline of our nation’s rural communities. 6, 17
    
  • Health disparities: In many cases, the burden of public health harms arising from IFAP falls disproportionately upon low-income communities and communities of color — populations already affected by poorer health status and lack of access to medical care.6
    
  • Foodborne illness: Disease-causing microorganisms originating in IFAP operations, including antibiotic-resistant pathogens, can enter our food supply at various points. When animal waste contaminates water sources, for example, contaminants can be transferred to plant surfaces when crops are irrigated.18 The scale and speed of meat processing plants also present frequent opportunities for widespread contamination.
  Meat Production: Global and Ecological Concerns
  Industrial food animal production (IFAP) contributes to ecological harms that affect our land, air, and water. Raising animals for food also has implications for global climate change, and our capacity to feed a growing global population.
  • Animal waste: Waste from IFAP operations can pollute waterways, contributing to “dead zones” that are devoid of most aquatic life. Manure spills from swine operations have also been implicated in outbreaks of toxic microorganisms that resulted in massive fish kills.1
    
  • Water use: Growing crops for animal feed entails a highly inefficient use of water, and places a strain on diminishing freshwater reserves. By some estimates, between 1,6002 and 2,5003 gallons of water are needed to produce one pound of feedlot beef. Globally, an estimated 27 percent of the water “footprint” of humanity is attributable to meat and dairy production.4
    
  • Climate change: Animal agriculture generates a significant amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change, and the increased frequency and severity of flooding, droughts, and other weather events expected to follow.5 The production, processing, distribution and retailing of animal products in the United States accounts for an estimated 9 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions6,7; worldwide estimates are closer to 15 percent.8 Major sources of emissions include cattle belching, animal manure, and synthetic fertilizers used to grow feed crops.7
    
  • Land use: Contrary to claims that IFAP is efficient, the vast majority of calories and protein in feed crops are lost when they are converted to animal products.9 Beef production is particularly inefficient; per unit of meat, cattle consume on average three times as many calories from feed compared to hogs and poultry.
    
  • Global food security: By some estimates, global food production would need to double by 2050 if we expect to feed the growing population. The prospect of attaining this goal is severely limited by the amount of agricultural land devoted to raising animals for food. In North America, for example, only 40 percent of cropland is devoted to growing food for direct human consumption; the bulk of the remainder is devoted to feed crops.10

here is one more link, a highly advance system to regulate food according to climate change in Developed Country.
As I said, in warm place Red meat is not suitable.. hence should be regulated well.

EHP – Climate Change and Food Security: Health Impacts in Developed Countries

Objectives: We investigated the potential impact of climate change on food security (nutrition and food safety) and the implications for human health in developed countries.

Results:Developed countries have complex structures in place that may be used to adapt to the food safety consequences of climate change, although their effectiveness will vary between countries, and the ability to respond to nutritional challenges is less certain.

Conclusions: Climate change will have notable impacts upon nutrition and food safety in developed countries, but further research is necessary to accurately quantify these impacts. Uncertainty about future impacts, coupled with evidence that climate change may lead to more variable food quality, emphasizes the need to maintain and strengthen existing structures and policies to regulate food production, monitor food quality and safety, and respond to nutritional and safety issues that arise.

For detailed research paper, open the link. EHP – Climate Change and Food Security: Health Impacts in Developed Countries


And we Indians get so fascinated by the west that we eat anything, even Goo, which comes from the west.

 

[SirHatesALot]

Good news for Rat meat.

 

[Raul_AD]

Possible Link Between Red Meat Consumption And Increased Cancer Risk Identified | IFLScience

While the effect of eating meat on the risk of developing cancer is a contentious topic, the evidence that long-term consumption of red meat is strongly linked with a modest, but significant, increase in the risk of developing bowel cancer is convincing. However, scientists have failed to find a mechanism to explain this apparent association, despite several hypotheses having been put forward in the past. But now, a new study conducted on mice is finally offering us some insight.

They found that a particular sugar, which is present in high quantities in red meat, could be triggering an inflammatory immune response, which is known to encourage the development of cancers. Furthermore, long-term exposure of this sugar to mice was found to significantly promote spontaneous cancers. The work has been published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

It is well recognized that the long-term consumption of red meat is associated with an increased risk for certain cancers in humans, in particular colorectal (bowel) cancer. But what has perplexed scientists is why the same does not seem to be true for other carnivorous animals.

One factor that scientists identified as a potential culprit for red meat’s apparent carcinogenic effects is a sugar called Neu5Gc, which is found in most carnivores but not humans. Even though humans can’t synthesize this molecule, it has been found in high levels in some cancerous tissue.

To find out more about whether this sugar could be contributing to the increased cancer risk, scientists from the University of California, San Diego, surveyed common foods to find out which contained the most Neu5Gc. They found that it is highly and selectively enriched in red meat, such as pork, beef and lamb.

Previous work discovered that one form of Neu5Gc is bioavailable, meaning that it can be distributed throughout the body via the bloodstream. Furthermore, despite being a foreign substance, it becomes incorporated into human tissues.

The researchers therefore hypothesized that the presence of this sugar in our bodies could be triggering an immune response, which in turn leads to inflammation and subsequently the promotion of tumor formation.

To test this out, they engineered mice to be deficient in Neu5Gc, mimicking the situation in humans. The team notes that these mice are already prone to develop tumors in the liver, an organ that can incorporate Neu5Gc.

They then fed these mice a diet enriched with Neu5Gc for 12 weeks and gave them regular injections with Neu5Gc antibodies to replicate what happens in our bodies. Sure enough, the mice developed systemic inflammation and experienced a five-fold increase in the incidence of cancers.

While this is the first study to show that mimicking the situation in humans increases the development of spontaneous cancers in mice, the researchers acknowledge that it will be much more difficult to prove in humans. However, the results could provide a possible explanation for the links between red meat consumption and other diseases worsened by chronic inflammation, such as type 2 diabetes.

“Of course, moderate amounts of red meat can be a source of good nutrition in young people,” lead researcher Ajit Varki said in a news-release. “We hope that our work will eventually lead the way to practical solutions for this catch-22.”

[Via PNAS, UCSD, Discover and Medscape]

here is one more link, a highly advance system to regulate food according to climate change in Developed Country.
As I said, in warm place Red meat is not suitable.. hence should be regulated well.

EHP – Climate Change and Food Security: Health Impacts in Developed Countries

Objectives: We investigated the potential impact of climate change on food security (nutrition and food safety) and the implications for human health in developed countries.

Results:Developed countries have complex structures in place that may be used to adapt to the food safety consequences of climate change, although their effectiveness will vary between countries, and the ability to respond to nutritional challenges is less certain.

Conclusions: Climate change will have notable impacts upon nutrition and food safety in developed countries, but further research is necessary to accurately quantify these impacts. Uncertainty about future impacts, coupled with evidence that climate change may lead to more variable food quality, emphasizes the need to maintain and strengthen existing structures and policies to regulate food production, monitor food quality and safety, and respond to nutritional and safety issues that arise.

For detailed research paper, open the link. EHP – Climate Change and Food Security: Health Impacts in Developed Countries


And we Indians get so fascinated by the west that we eat anything, even Goo, which comes from the west.

Hehehehehehehe he is in **** Denial Mode.

Let him - Good for him.

Beef party is been ruined............

 

[The_Showstopper]

Good news for Rat meat.

Don't even think of that.....
Even that will be banned.

Vahanas of Ganesha | My Lord Ganesha

Then we will have PDF warriors discussing as to how rat meat is bad for humans...

 

[Screambowl]

Don't even think of that.....
Even that will be banned.

Vahanas of Ganesha | My Lord Ganesha

Then we will have PDF warriors discussing as to how rat meat is bad for humans...

that means we respect every creature.

 

[The_Showstopper]

that means we respect every creature.

Good for you...

 

[Screambowl]

Don't even think of that.....
Even that will be banned.

Vahanas of Ganesha | My Lord Ganesha

Then we will have PDF warriors discussing as to how rat meat is bad for humans...


Good for you...

and for them and for humanity and life

 

[Bornubus]

Do not not mind him. Earlier he wanted to be a pathan and pathans here handed his *** over to him..Now he wanted to be a Lucknow guy..his fetishes changes time to time

I know lukhnawis .....they are mostly Shia they hate Pakistanis for the killings of Shia in Pak....and i find hilarious that a Pakistani called himself ....luckhnawi

 

[The_Showstopper]

and for them and for humanity and life

If you care so much for "life", why kill plants with life?

 

[Screambowl]

If you care so much for "life", why kill plants with life?

Ever heard about difference in minimum collateral damage and maximum collateral damage?

 

[The_Showstopper]

Ever heard about difference in minimum collateral damage and maximum collateral damage?

So how do you decide which is minimum and which is max?