||back to previous page
A way of living, which if adopted by the great majority of human beings, would allow for the continuance of a healthy ecosystem capable of supporting diverse forms of plant and animal life, and clean water and air.
Common confusion: Those propagating the "humane myth" often refer to one form of using and killing animals, or one type of animal product, as being "more sustainable" than another, or simply as "sustainable." At current rates of consumption, no form of animal agriculture now known is sustainable. On the contrary, a recent study carried out by UN scientists demonstrated that animal agriculture is the number one source of greenhouse gas impact, making a greater contribution to global warming than all cars, trucks, buses, air planes, trains, and ships combined. Even if there were enough land available to raise the more than 50 billion animals now being used and killed annually worldwide on the idyllic "Old McDonald's farm," the result would still be a continuation of the ecological catastrophe now underway. Further, the production of food for a diet based on grains, nuts, vegetables and fruits uses several times less energy and water and creates vastly less pollution than a diet based on meat, milk, and eggs.
back to previous page
Frequently Asked Questions
If I care about animals, but still eat animal products, isn't it more compassionate to buy "humane" animal products?
What about the middle ground? Isn't "humane" meat a sustainable, socially-responsible alternative?