Whether it’s mass deforestation, tick bites causing strange food allergies, or an industry
defined by its cruelty, there are many reasons why people just aren't eating beef.
Even with a passing familiarity with Hinduism, you may have heard about the faith's veneration
of cattle and its prohibition against eating beef.
The roots of this prohibition comes from the Mahabharata, an ancient Sanskrit epic in which
a king goes hunting during a time of famine, which included the passage,
"The Earth assumed the form of a cow and begged him to spare her life; she then allowed him
to milk her for all that the people needed."
Contrary to popular belief, beef was eaten by observant Hindus before the legend of the
savior cow.
In the fourth century B.C. — even after other faith groups in India had turned to
vegetarianism — written records claimed that Hindus raised cattle and ate the beef
of castrated steers.
Female animals were only consumed for ritual purposes or were served to honored guests.
Hinduism's prohibition against consuming beef didn’t randomly begin overnight.
It first took hold among the higher castes in society — such as the Brahmins — who
embraced stricter dietary restrictions than the lower castes.
This emerging prohibition against beef consumption likely stemmed from a combination of factors,
including the association of cows with female purity and nurturing as well as the association
of cattle with the Brahmins, the highest and most revered of the Hindu castes.
"The veneration of cows quite likely traces millenia and to its utility on farms, or transportation."
This association between cattle the Brahmin caste led others to view the rejection of
beef as a sign of high social status, and soon social strivers from the lower castes
began to emulate the Brahmins and likewise stop eating beef.
It's controversial whether this sacrifice led to improvements in the lives of the lower
castes, but it set the stage for the complete prohibition of beef consumption for Hindus
worldwide.
Even those without religious or spiritual motivations can find eating beef problematic
for a number of reasons.
In recent years, a major reason many diners have stopped or reduced their consumption
of beef is due to climate change.
Cattle generate methane in their digestive tracts as the food they consume ferments.
When they belch, this gas enters the atmosphere, contributing to the greenhouse effect.
Believe it or not, there are indeed enough belching beef cattle out there to cause serious
damage.
Livestock production is responsible for around 15% of greenhouse gas emissions, with cattle
specifically responsible for around 65% of worldwide livestock emissions.
Some beef producers are attempting to mitigate the problem by feeding their cattle seaweed
— which doesn't induce as much methane production — and using more sustainable farming methods.
But it doesn't appear to be enough.
Cattle require a lot of space, food, and other resources.
The growing international demand for beef inevitably leads to a growing demand for land
to raise the cattle, which has led to rapid — and often unauthorized — development
of sensitive ecosystems into cattle ranches.
This growing trend is especially noticeable in the Amazon rainforest, where the supply
chain of a single large beef processor is thought to be responsible for the destruction
of twenty-eight-thousand to thirty-two-thousand hectares of rainforest each year.
This threatens the welfare of the planet itself, as the rainforest captures and stores nearly
a quarter of the Earth's CO2.
"Unless there's a significant change to Brazilian law and enforcement, it's unlikely to have
the effect the world really needs."
The environmental degradation doesn't stop there, since the mass amount of manure produced
on most feedlots is far too much to simply put in the trash.
Instead, it's sprayed onto fields for dispersal or stored in open pit lagoons.
This can result in antibiotics, pesticides, bacteria, and heavy metals getting into the
soil.
And if the manure is disposed of near sensitive watersheds, there's a risk that it'll also
get into the water — a resource already being stressed by cattle being raised there.
According to the scientists and professor David Pimentel, feedlots require 100,000 liters
of water for every kilogram of food produced.
In contrast, potatoes require only 500 liters of water per kilogram of food produced.
Not all diners who avoid beef do so by choice.
On rare occasions, even some who crave a good steak are forced to choose between their love
of beef and their own safety.
This is due to an allergy to beef and dairy that some people develop, and in some cases,
beef consumption can trigger anaphylactic shock and potentially lead to death.
If you suddenly find yourself breaking into hives or getting short of breath after eating
beef, the culprit may be a lone star tick.
The bites of these pesky critters — which live in the Southeastern region of the United
States — are known to trigger allergic reactions to alpha-gal, a sugar molecule found in red
meat.
It's still unknown exactly how these tick bites cause humans to develop this allergy,
but those who live in the affected regions that want to keep eating beef safely need
to use caution.
Wear insect repellent in tick-infested areas and regularly check yourself carefully for
any attached ticks.
If this sounds like too much work, and you don't want to give up burgers because of a
bug, it's probably best to avoid brushy, potentially tick-infested areas altogether.
Most of us experience certain foods that just don't sit well.
For some, beans leave them gassy and uncomfortable.
Certain veggies can be tricky for some to digest, causing stomach aches.
Or hot sauce makes your guts feel as if they're melting.
These reactions aren't technically allergies — they're food intolerances, when the digestive
system overreacts to some component of the food being digested.
"About twenty percent of people can have a food intolerance.
It is usually due to an enzyme deficiency."
Beef is one of those foods that some find difficult to eat without enduring uncomfortable
repercussions later on.
Those who live with a beef intolerance may experience cramps, bloating, diarrhea, and
fatigue.
But unlike a beef allergy, beef intolerance is unlikely to lead to life-threatening complications.
Fortunately for sufferers, a beef intolerance is often temporary, brought on by stress or
environmental factors — including additives in the meat — and many find that they can
return to eating beef after taking a break from it for a while.
The rising popularity of high-protein, low-carb diets — such as paleo, keto, and Whole30
diets and their variations — has led many to turn to beef as a healthy and clean source
of protein and fat.
Lean, grass-fed beef in particular is popular among these diets.
But not everyone thinks beef is a wise nutritional source.
Doctor Donald Hensrud, Director of Mayo Clinic's Healthy Living Program, told GQ,
"The bottom line is the health risks of consuming red and processed meat outweigh any benefits."
The relatively high amounts of saturated fat and cholesterol in beef can increase chances
of heart disease, and consuming large amounts of red meat is thought to raise the risk of
cancer, since the heme iron found in red meat arguably contributes to the production of
cancer-causing compounds.
If this weren't bad enough, heavy beef consumption is also associated with higher rates of obesity
and elevated rates of Type 2 diabetes.
With all these risks, it's no wonder some health-conscious diners are shying away from
beef.
Along with the many religious, environmental, and nutritional reasons to reject beef are
a number of ethical concerns — such as beef cattle literally taking available food from
the mouths of hungry humans.
"If you can grow corn to stuff down the throat of an animal, you can actually grow corn and
feed it to a human."
Among the first to bring this concern to popular attention was activist and author Frances
Moore Lappé, and her 1971 vegetarian cookbook Diet for a Small Planet, argued that the grain
used to feed cattle could be more productively used to feed people.
Lappé told FoodPrint,
"The estimate is that 80% of our agricultural land, including grazing for livestock, returns
to us about 18% of our calories.
That seems an extra-inefficient way to feed ourselves."
David Pimentel agreed, saying in an address to the Canadian Society of Animal Science,
"More than half the U.S. grain and nearly 40% of world grain is being fed to livestock
[...] Although grain production is increasing in total, the per capita supply has been decreasing
for more than a decade."
The more obvious ethical reason some diners choose not to eat beef is that it's not in
the best interest of the cattle themselves.
For these individuals, the very idea of taking the life of a sentient animal for food is
unacceptable.
For others, the manner in which cattle are raised and processed into beef is needlessly
cruel.
While pasture-raised cattle can lead relatively comfortable lives, these represent a tiny
fraction of the beef industry.
Most beef cattle start their lives in pastures but are transferred to feedlots for fattening
in the last six months of their lives.
Not only are these feedlots cramped and dirty, but these cattle are fattened on grain — which
is much more difficult for them to digest than grass.
This dietary change can cause cattle discomfort and even illness, with their lives only going
downhill from there.
The trip to the slaughterhouse often involves long travel in cramped trucks in extreme weather
conditions, with many cattle panicking when they're forced into the cramped chutes which
constrain them for slaughter.
While these cattle are supposed to be stunned — and in principle, completely unconscious
— these processes sometimes fail, leading to reports of slaughterhouse workers having
to eviscerate still-conscious animals.
It's no secret most beef cattle live far from natural lifestyles.
Besides being physically constrained and subjected to unnatural diets, often being separated
from their family groups before sale or slaughter, they live artificially short and accelerated
lives.
While cattle can naturally live as long as 15-20 years, beef cattle typically live only
a year or two.
"The industrial food system is always looking for greater efficiency, but each new step
in efficiency leads to problems."
Because ranchers want to get as much saleable meat from their cattle as they can, it's a
common practice in industrial beef production to treat beef cattle with growth hormones.
These are typically administered in small pellets implanted under their skin by the
ears.
This practice is no secret, and a major factor behind consumers being concerned that those
artificial hormones can be passed on to beef-eating humans.
However, according to The North Dakota State University Extension, the hormones given to
cattle are the same as those that occur naturally in all beef, and are strictly regulated by
the USDA.
While the University acknowledges that hormone-treated cattle do have higher estrogen levels than
non-treated cows, it's still less than the naturally occurring estrogen levels found
in other common foods, such as soy and eggs.
Still, the forcing of cattle into unnatural growth spurts is enough to make beef a no-go
for some diners.