To learn more about the upcoming Special Edition of Satya and Call for Submissions, click here.

How to cost the plate which costs the earth

WHAT’S THE REAL COST OF A MEAT-EATER? Or let me phrase it in the converse: what are the real savings of a vegetarian? Seem like funny questions? If you’re a meat-eater, have you thought about the effect your lifestyle has on the rest of us in the way of an economic burden; or the stress your lifestyle puts on the environment that future generations must inherit? And, have you considered the moral cost we all pay with the acceptance of violence represented in the food on your plate? Let’s explore some of these costs and perhaps find out if meat-eaters are paying their own way — somewhat similar to determining if smokers are paying their own way after the taxes they pay on cigarettes.

Meat-eaters get sick more often, and die sooner; when they do die, they die of expensive ailments. If you know anything about the way health and life insurance works, or is supposed to work, meat-eaters should be paying higher premiums for this. But, so far, I have not heard of an insurance company asking a potential customer whether or not he or she eats meat. In this country it’s assumed you (never assume, I say; never assume!).

What are the statistics, though? The fact is that half of all deaths in this country are due to heart disease and strokes — expensive diseases directly tied to a meat-centered diet. Cancer, another expensive disease, is also associated with a meat-centered diet. Cancers of the breast, colon and even lung, among others, are higher for meat-eaters. In addition, meat-eaters suffer more often with nagging ailments such as hemorrhoids, arthritis, respiratory sicknesses and spastic colon, just to name a few. These problems send them to the doctor more often. You vegetarian readers out there — how do you feel about universal health coverage when you know you’ll be paying for millions of people going to the doctor for problems (many problems) you’ll never have?

The problem with comparing vegetarians to meat-eaters in terms of cost is that most of the costs are hidden. Just as environmental destruction occurring as a by-product of industry is not computed as part of the gross national product, the correlation between economic burden and our society’s meat-centered diet is also not officially accounted for.

Take the following examples. To supply demand for meat foods, the meat and dairy industries have been pushing pesticides onto the land, and hormones and antibiotics into animals. What are the hidden costs of these things, especially in terms of health? I will simply say it amounts to more toxicity in our bodies causing disease. And, as people continue to self-medicate themselves on a daily basis with small traces of antibiotics in the meat-foods they eat, harmful bacteria are becoming even more virulent as the strong bacteria survive and threaten us all — not just meat-eaters.

It takes 20 times more land to sustain a person who is eating the standard American meat-centered diet compared to the person who eats no foods derived from animals at all. Twenty times! What does that translate into? I’ll tell you... deforestation, encroachment upon the wilderness areas’ diminishing bio-diversity, and depletion of non-renewable natural resources such as fossil fuels, water and topsoil (note: the average number of inches of topsoil in the U.S. is now about 6 inches, down from 21 inches just 200 years ago). And what about pollution to water and air? With livestock producing no less than 20 times the excrement of the entire U.S. human population, animal agriculture is one of the dirtiest industries, — indeed, when it comes to organic waste, it is the dirtiest.

Where does this animal waste go? A livestock operator may properly store, disperse or degrade animal waste, or simply flush it away, dangerously raising ammonia and nitrate levels in the drinking water. Here, without question, vegetarians, and especially vegans, contribute little or nothing at all to this extensive strain on the environment. Who pays for the cleanup? Not the farmers. The taxpayers do. All taxpayers; vegetarians too.
I just hinted at government subsidies to farmers to clean up the pollution of waterways. There are many subsidies, however, to agriculture in the U.S.. Today, many cattle ranchers pay well below market rates for grazing rights on public lands. It is commonly known that grain farmers (those people who grow grain to feed to animals so people can eat those animals) as well as dairy farmers enjoy price supports. In addition, the government buys cheese and milk surplusses from farmers. None of this is fair to the vegetarian taxpayer. Another boon to the cattle rancher is the predator control that the U.S. government affords the industry "on the house," or should I say "on the House (of Representatives)?"

Finally, what is the cost, albeit intangible, in the acceptance of the violence represented by meat on our plate? Obviously a lot of rationalization must go on in a meat-eater’s mind. Like an original sin perhaps — if one can rationalize about this violence, though out of sight, one can rationalize about the next violence he or she encounters. The dirty work and the cruelty at the slaughterhouse, the chicken factory shed, in the veal crate, in the milking parlor or bacon bin are all behind closed doors. When we order a burger, we must say to ourselves, this is okay. So, we rationalize violence this time — after all, everyone is doing it. But what about next time? Are we going to be responsible next time when we hear about violence we cannot see but for which we, perhaps just by virtue of being a citizen of this country, have a responsibility for? I’ll leave these questions rhetorical.

Let’s again re-state simply what I’ve said up until now. Meat-eaters inflict a heavy burden on vegetarians — we pay dearly for the meat addictions of our fellow citizens today; and if things continue as they are, future generations of vegetarians will pay even more dearly. As of yet we vegetarians are not allowed tax breaks nor lower insurance premiums for our gentle lifestyle. This needs to change. Let’s force meat-eaters to pay their own way. The first problem is, few people even know how costly our society’s meat-centered diet is.

As a person who goes out regularly as a vegetarian street advocate, I’ve become familiar with the puzzled stares of passersby. "Why are you doing this?," I’m asked. "What’s wrong with meat? Meat’s good for you." Could you imagine similar questions and statements about cigarettes?

Why is it that something so costly, so wasteful, so polluting, so unhealthy, and so cruel as eating flesh foods could go so unchallenged? As I struggle to pick myself up from the absurdity of the present malaise, I first try to remind myself of the commercial influences of the meat industry as well as the reality that our media has been completely co-opted by corporate interests. I then try to remember great human struggles of the past; and the struggle to make a vegetarian world is indeed a great human struggle.