No, because eating meat kills more plants than eating plants does. The farm animals get fed from plants, and not all of that energy ends up as calories in meat, meaning you need to kill more plants to get the same amount of calories.
To expand upon what Ephera said, chicken typically yields about 12 calories of output for every 100 calories used as input. Beef is abysmally low at 3 calories out per 100 calories in. If someone genuinely believes that plants feel pain (which they categorically don’t) and wants to cause the least possible, the first thing they would want to cut out is meat. That’s just thermodynamics at work.
The killing of (unwanted) plants to feed livestock can happen away from factory farms too - but on the plus side it leaves us with lush green fields of soft short grasses as the herd wanders and grazes. It’s worth remembering that industrial farming - regardless of your dietary position - blights almost everything it comes in contact with.
No, because eating meat kills more plants than eating plants does. The farm animals get fed from plants, and not all of that energy ends up as calories in meat, meaning you need to kill more plants to get the same amount of calories.
Didn’t realise that… Thanks!
To expand upon what Ephera said, chicken typically yields about 12 calories of output for every 100 calories used as input. Beef is abysmally low at 3 calories out per 100 calories in. If someone genuinely believes that plants feel pain (which they categorically don’t) and wants to cause the least possible, the first thing they would want to cut out is meat. That’s just thermodynamics at work.
The killing of (unwanted) plants to feed livestock can happen away from factory farms too - but on the plus side it leaves us with lush green fields of soft short grasses as the herd wanders and grazes. It’s worth remembering that industrial farming - regardless of your dietary position - blights almost everything it comes in contact with.