Reducing our meat consumption, what consequences for French agriculture?

[Moindreffor]

However, no biological modification has occurred since his time as a gatherer / scavenger, thus underlining his constant suitable food destination.

So you deny the cave representations of hunting scenes, of all the hunting weapons to reduce man to a simple scavenger, so it is a negation of a whole section of prehistory that you want to impose on us?

[Moindreffor]

So revisiting past biological errors is not a question of 'particular social stratum, but of awareness (often because of the diseases that this type of supposedly omnivorous food has produced over the centuries and which continues to this day) or, to use the formula,"we only harvest what we sow" as can be seen in our current "civilized" societies

So the last primitive civilizations discovered, hunt and fish to please explorers? or because they did not realize their mistake? yet there are no cardiovascular diseases or obesity among them, therefore humans naturally consume meat, it is the excess of their consumption that creates the problem, and it is indeed in our "civilized" societies that pose the problem

[Rajqawee]

So you can see that we shouldn't get into this debate! I told you !

It drifts! While with my history of sausage, at least, we were laughing.

The question is not to eat OR NOT meat, the question is "what would it do to reduce our consumption of meat in agriculture". And we said to ourselves, hey, let's take 50% less, to think.

[sicetaitsimple]

The question is not to eat OR NOT meat, the question is "what would it do to reduce our consumption of meat in agriculture". And we said to ourselves, hey, let's take 50% less, to think.

+1, of course.

[sicetaitsimple]

For my part, I stopped putting meat in my usual dishes without necessarily replacing it with something else ... it's really not difficult and it's also thrifty.

Well, it's a bit on the sidelines, but not necessarily "serious". I don't really understand .... Reduce the proportion of meat in a dish, a recipe, OK. But is it no longer the same recipe to remove it completely? Examples?

[izentrop]

Absolutely. My wife went on a vegetarian diet, I am but that does not prevent me from doing pranks. If it is to take food supplements to compensate for the deficiencies of such a diet, in my opinion it is ridiculous.

Arrgh! Vegetarian?
Vegetarian or vegan?

Indeed, not Vespasian, vegetarian
It is connected to L214, but I know very well that these people only show excess. Relativity, "reasoned agriculture" as Alkaline says they do not know.

My hens have a good life, but it is paradoxical, the more I have, the less I have eggs.

[Ahmed]

Although I understand this concern, it is all the same astonishing to focus on the reconversion of a part of the breeders, when no one is moved by the indirect unemployment caused by the permanent productivity gains ... and the important waves current redundancies supposed to "clean up" the companies concerned.
Regarding taste, it has 2 aspects, cultural and personal; the first evolves and does not constitute fixed data, the second can change more quickly, because it is mainly the result of a habit. For example, I have never been a big eater of meat and consider that it would be more ethical (not ethical, eh!) To restrict it as much as possible (in this context, the socio-cultural can constitute a brake) , I noticed that the little taste that I had in it gradually diminished with my greater moderation, to the point that I now have to make an effort to ingest the little that remains in my meals (I would give it up totally without my entourage who deserve this form of respect).
However, I allow myself some daring, as was the case during a visit to Charolais where, having ordered a single dish of raw vegetables at the inn, I was treated with great solicitude by the boss who doubtless believed me suffering from an extremely serious disease!

Izentrop, you write:

It is connected to L214, but I know very well that these people only show excess.

Industry and the spirit that allows it to function requires that we consider things casually, as simple means available; it follows that she treats animals as things and humans as animals (while claiming the opposite). These brutalities are more or less "excessive", but are an integral part of the process ...

[sicetaitsimple]

Absolutely. My wife went on a vegetarian diet, I am but that does not prevent me from doing pranks. If it is to take food supplements to compensate for the deficiencies of such a diet, in my opinion it is ridiculous.

Arrgh! Vegetarian?
Vegetarian or vegan?

Indeed, not Vespasian, vegetarian
My hens have a good life, but it is paradoxical, the more I have, the less I have eggs.

Phew, vegetarian, you got away with it! You can at least continue to consume these cheeses from the North of France, so typical by their smell! (one of my grandmother was a native of Hazebrouck, she was asked by my grandfather to go eat her cheese in the cellar, which she did, that was no joke at the time!).
For chickens, follows the precepts of this good King Henry IV, a hen in the pot every Sunday. It may give those who stay the motivation to get back to it .

[Janic]

So the last primitive civilizations discovered, hunt and fish to please explorers?

And why not to Santa Claus? It makes no sense ! Thought a bit from the science in biology and anatomy. If your car is gasoline, it is not designed for diesel. But as these are simple mechanics, it is possible to mix petrol and diesel in part, but in both cases the operation will not be optimum and even worse in biology with much more complex mechanisms.
So, out of opportunism, human societies have adapted to the products available where their peregrinations had taken them, by choice or by constraint, particularly during the winter in certain regions.
So between starving and consuming food on the spot (and particularly for nomadic societies who cannot take their fields with them) and therefore they eat canned products by salting, smoking, drying; but above all live food, on legs, always out of survival opportunism which will then turn into a permanent food culture.

or because they did not realize their mistake?

Effectively ! Today we have enormous means of controlling food products of all kinds, the reactions of organisms to these products with beneficial or harmful effects on the biological level (tobacco is a poison on the pharmacological level, like alcohol or any other drug and yet consumed for centuries by culture, again, but that none of the current scientific means could declare as harmful, such as on cancers.) So no established statistics before these modern technologies and yet these scourges existed and could be seen firsthand.

yet in them no cardiovascular disease or obesity,

because of a strong physical activity which favors toxic elimination, which is measured now, again, with our sophisticated devices, but the centenarians are rare there and particularly in very cold regions.

therefore humans naturally consume meat,

Obviously he uses it like alcohol, tobacco and other drugs like cannabis or just coffee, but he's not designed for that!

it is the excess of its consumption that creates the problem, and it is indeed in our "civilized" societies that the problem arises.

again it is a very common cliché! The idea is that if it cannot be seen, it is because it does not exist and the notion of excess is only so in relation to specific criteria, not hastily. Like the ad, transformed into a maxim on the reasonable consumption of alcohol. Reasonable what is it? A glass, a liter for those who drink regularly. But again, scientifically, the reasonable dose is ...zero and therefore all those who exceed this margin take upon themselves the disadvantages and risks of any consumption. But here culture, like the bidoche, is precisely not of a scientific order, but affective since everyone uses this term: " I love, it's good ”a good meal, a good cigar, but not I like a good headache consecutive or a glandular disorder or filter organs screwed up by these behaviors and that medicine then seeks to repair (when possible ) with lifelong consequences and side effects and you know something about it.

[Rajqawee]

Although I understand this concern, it is all the same astonishing to focus on the reconversion of a part of the breeders, when no one is moved by the indirect unemployment caused by the permanent productivity gains ... and the important waves. current dismissals supposed to "clean up" the companies concerned.

But yes, we do care.
It is also right on the subject. We took the breeders as an example, but I spoke well of the sector: today, an entire part of the economy is organized and busy producing meat. What do we do with this pan if we consume half the amount?
A priori, it will be necessary to reorient them, to reconvert them. This is exactly why our societies are difficult to manage quickly: this kind of transition, under 10 years, is very hard to carry out, socially, socially, logistically.