Catholic Hospitals Reduce Meat Consumption

[Marfran]

Are there any moral imperatives, in addition to health considerations, for us to consider reducing meat consumption, both personally and as a society??? prlog.org/10352226-hospit…challenge.html —

 

[Marfran]

Catholic Hospitals Reduce Climate Impact by Reducing Meat Consumption.

*St. Joseph Health System *in Sonoma County, California, is among 14 hospitals currently participating in *Health Care Without Harm’s *national Balanced Menus Challenge. This voluntary climate change reduction strategy to reduce meat consumption by 20 percent also protects the effectiveness of antibiotics and promotes good nutrition. While the *U.S. Department of Agriculture *recommends up to six ounces of meat/fish/poultry/beans per day, hospital food service operations tend to mirror the average American consumption rate of more than 8 ounces per day.

Do you know what is the carbon footprint of livestock production? A* United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization’s* report ***Livestock’s Long Shadow ***found that livestock production generates an estimated 18 percent of total human-induced greenhouse-gas emissions globally (greater than transport). Reducing our intake of meat can be a way to “act to reduce our carbon footprint” as part of the St. Francis Pledge. catholicclimatecovenant.org/the-st-francis-pledge/

 

[4elise]

I’m so impressed that Catholic Hospitals would make this effort - and recognize that it isn’t just an issue of reducing meat for health ---- great article!

 

[SuzySunshine]

I’m so impressed that Catholic Hospitals would make this effort - and recognize that it isn’t just an issue of reducing meat for health ---- great article!

I agree. I’m glad to see that Catholic hospitals are stepping up. Meat contributes to a lot of health problems but also has negative effects on our environment, and continuing to overconsume it will affect the future for our children.

I feel that we have a moral obligation to address the issue.

 

[Marfran]

Are there any moral imperatives, in addition to health considerations, for us to consider reducing meat consumption, both personally and as a society??? prlog.org/10352226-hospit…challenge.html —

Yes, I know, it’s not as exciting of a topic as is a foot fetish a sin? (people are coming in droves to that thread–over 4,600 hits), but our meat consumption is out of hand, and it’s good to see that Catholic hospitals are stepping up and taking action.

I assume that most people are aware of the health implications in consuming meat, especially in excess, and the prudence in reducing it from one’s diet, but there are other ethical reasons to reduce/eliminate meat, including:

Jamie Harvie, chair of the HCWH Healthy Food in Health Care Initiative: “Encouraging a reduced and sustainable meat diet is part of a primary prevention agenda to reduce the nation’s chronic diet-related illnesses, but also contributes substantially to climate mitigation, clean air and water, and protection of the effectiveness of antibiotics.”

 

[Mattapoisett64]

A dissenting voice here: I see nothing either Catholic nor reasonable in this action, promoting the politically correct and culturally trendy on the backs of hospitalized people. Assuming for the moment that what one gets in the hospital is actually meat – highly dubious based on my own hospitalizations – one neeeds to ask why people who are by definition recovering strength, debilitated, in need of good nutrition, etc. should have their “ration” reduced by 20% in the name of the Gore-ist notion of “carbon footprint.” As George Will pointed out in an article published yesterday, even the New York Times, that sacred text of political correctness and the culturally styleish, is having trouble keeping a straight face on the whole subject of global warming and man-caused climate change in the face of data showing a 10-year-plus “plateau” in temperature.

If we should be so concerned about “carbon footprints,” perhaps the carbon load generated when Mr. and Mrs. Obama each took separate jumbo jets to Denmark to shill for the Olympics that at least half the people of Chicago don’t want should be discussed. (Actually, a total of THREE jumbo jets because Air Force One always travels with a backup plane also.)

 

[Marfran]

A dissenting voice here: I see nothing either Catholic nor reasonable in this action, promoting the politically correct and culturally trendy on the backs of hospitalized people.

Say what, brother??? You see nothing reasonable??? Politically correct, culturally trendy??? After someone just had surgery to remove gunk from their arteries, you want to feed them the same food that contributed to their heart disease??? You don’t see the prudence of reducing the intake to at least what the USDA recommends???

**The USDA recommends 5-6 oz of meat/fish/poultry/beans per day , and for meat alone, Americans on average eat 8 oz daily. Hospital food service operations often mirror this trend, offering sizable servings of meat several meals per day. High consumption of conventionally produced meat and processed meat contributes to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, dementia, and some kinds of cancer. Over-consumption of meat contributes to the overwhelming cost of the US health system (estimated to be $147B as a result of obesity management alone) as well as environmental damage such as climate change, water and air pollution. **

Assuming for the moment that what one gets in the hospital is actually meat – highly dubious based on my own hospitalizations –

Yes, corn filler has been showing up in hamburger, etc.

one neeeds to ask why people who are by definition recovering strength, debilitated, in need of good nutrition, etc.

Exactly, exactly!!! Why aren’t hospitals feeding patients good nutrition??? Why are they feeding them all that excess, unhealthy meat???

should have their “ration” reduced by 20% in the name of the Gore-ist notion of “carbon footprint.”

Well, I’m not exactly a follower of Al Gore, but are you saying that we should pay no attention to our use of fossil fuels??? Should we just burn it all up until it’s gone (regardless of whether the use/overuse affects global warming or not)??

As George Will pointed out in an article published yesterday, even the New York Times, that sacred text of political correctness and the culturally styleish, is having trouble keeping a straight face on the whole subject of global warming and man-caused climate change in the face of data showing a 10-year-plus “plateau” in temperature.

If we should be so concerned about “carbon footprints,” perhaps the carbon load generated when Mr. and Mrs. Obama each took separate jumbo jets to Denmark to shill for the Olympics that at least half the people of Chicago don’t want should be discussed. (Actually, a total of THREE jumbo jets because Air Force One always travels with a backup plane also.)

Well, I totally agree. Why can’t they all use the same jumbo jet–call it skypooling.

 

[Newbie2]

Over-consumption of meat contributes to the overwhelming cost of the US health system (estimated to be $147B as a result of obesity management alone)

as well as environmental damage such as climate change, water and air pollution.

Unproven. A theory, but unproven.

Exactly, exactly!!! Why aren’t hospitals feeding patients good nutrition??? Why are they feeding them all that excess, unhealthy meat???

Maybe because it’s not unhealthy in the quantities that they feed it?

Well, I’m not exactly a follower of Al Gore, but are you saying that we should pay no attention to our use of fossil fuels??? Should we just burn it all up until it’s gone (regardless of whether the use/overuse affects global warming or not)??

Do what I say, not what I do=Al Gore’s message and most of the pols pushing the “Carbon footprint” nonsense.

Well, I totally agree. Why can’t they all use the same jumbo jet–call it skypooling.

Because they are a different class of people, the ruling class. They don’t give a rat’s butt about the environment; it’s about power and control of people’s lives.

 

[Marfran]

***Health Care Without Harm ***is an international coalition of more than 470 organizations in 52 countries working to transform the health care sector so it is no longer a source of harm to people and the environment.

noharm.org/#

 

[Marfran]

Because they are a different class of people, the ruling class. They don’t give a rat’s butt about the environment; it’s about power and control of people’s lives.

I like how you always use animals in your descriptions!!! You must work with animals!!!