I am assuming that cows/lamb live a net neutral life, which seems to be a reasonable assumption for trusted suppliers
Most informed people agree that beef and dairy cows live the best life of all factory farmed animals, more so than pigs, and much much more so than chickens.
Further, as you point out, beef and dairy cows produce much more food per animal (or suffering weighted days alive).
The pros of instead eating 100% grass-fed beef/lamb are that it may prevent wild animal suffering, since crop cultivation causes potentially painful animal deaths
I think you meant prevents painful deaths?
With this change, I don’t know, but this seems plausible. (I think amount of suffering depends on the land use and pesticides, but I don’t know if the scientific understanding is settled, and this subtopic may be distracting.)
I think you have a great question.
Note that extreme suffering in factory farming probably comes from very specific issues, concentrated in a few types of animals (caged hens suffering to death by the millions and other graphic situations).
This means that, if the assumptions in this discussion are true, and our concern is on animal suffering, decisions like beef versus tofu, or even much larger dietary decisions, seem small in comparison.
“Most informed people agree that beef and dairy cows live the best life of all factory farmed animals, more so than pigs, and much much more so than chickens. ”
I just wanted to note that I’m referring to 100% pasture fed lamb/beef. I think it’s very unlikely that it’s ethically permissable to eat factory farmed lamb/beef, even if it’s less bad than eating chickens, etc. I’d also caution against eating dairy since calves and mothers show signs of sadness when separated, although each dairy cow produces a lot of dairy (as you noted).
“I think you meant prevents painful deaths?”
Sorry, I probably could’ve worded this better, but my original wording was what I meant. My understanding is that crop cultivation for grains and beans causes painful wild animal deaths, but grass-fed cows/lamb do not eat crops and therefore, as far as I’m aware, do not cause wild animal deaths.
I certainly agree with your conclusion that not eating factory farmed chicken, pork, and eggs (and probably also fish) is the most important step! But I’d still like to do the very best with my own consumption.
Everything you said is fair and valid and seems right to me. Thank you for your thoughtful choices and reasoning.
Edit: I forgot you said entirely pasture/grass fed beef, so this waives the thoughts below.
A quibble:
Sorry, I probably could’ve worded this better, but my original wording was what I meant. My understanding is that crop cultivation for grains and beans causes painful wild animal deaths, but grass-fed cows/lamb do not eat crops and therefore, as far as I’m aware, do not cause wild animal deaths.
It seems that beef and dairy cows both use feed, not just grass. Because eating dairy/beef requires more calories of feed (trophic levels), it is possible the amount of land needed for beef might be large compared to land needed for soy.
Grass crops are a use of land that might have ambiguous effects on animal suffering.
I don’t know about either of 1) or 2) above.
I guess I am saying it is either good to be uncertain, or else get a good canonical source.
This is a really thoughtful and useful question.
Most informed people agree that beef and dairy cows live the best life of all factory farmed animals, more so than pigs, and much much more so than chickens.
Further, as you point out, beef and dairy cows produce much more food per animal (or suffering weighted days alive).
A calculator here can help make make the above thoughts more concrete, maybe you have seen it.
I think you meant prevents painful deaths?
With this change, I don’t know, but this seems plausible. (I think amount of suffering depends on the land use and pesticides, but I don’t know if the scientific understanding is settled, and this subtopic may be distracting.)
I think you have a great question.
Note that extreme suffering in factory farming probably comes from very specific issues, concentrated in a few types of animals (caged hens suffering to death by the millions and other graphic situations).
This means that, if the assumptions in this discussion are true, and our concern is on animal suffering, decisions like beef versus tofu, or even much larger dietary decisions, seem small in comparison.
Thanks Charles for your thoughtful response.
I just wanted to note that I’m referring to 100% pasture fed lamb/beef. I think it’s very unlikely that it’s ethically permissable to eat factory farmed lamb/beef, even if it’s less bad than eating chickens, etc. I’d also caution against eating dairy since calves and mothers show signs of sadness when separated, although each dairy cow produces a lot of dairy (as you noted).
Sorry, I probably could’ve worded this better, but my original wording was what I meant. My understanding is that crop cultivation for grains and beans causes painful wild animal deaths, but grass-fed cows/lamb do not eat crops and therefore, as far as I’m aware, do not cause wild animal deaths.
I certainly agree with your conclusion that not eating factory farmed chicken, pork, and eggs (and probably also fish) is the most important step! But I’d still like to do the very best with my own consumption.
Everything you said is fair and valid and seems right to me. Thank you for your thoughtful choices and reasoning.
Edit: I forgot you said entirely pasture/grass fed beef, so this waives the thoughts below.
A quibble:It seems that beef and dairy cows both use feed, not just grass. Because eating dairy/beef requires more calories of feed (trophic levels), it is possible the amount of land needed for beef might be large compared to land needed for soy.Grass crops are a use of land that might have ambiguous effects on animal suffering.I don’t know about either of 1) or 2) above.I guess I am saying it is either good to be uncertain, or else get a good canonical source.