Hannah Yzabel Q.

Pingol
10 -Garcia

DON’T HAVE A
COW, MAN.
A critic paper on the Health and Animal Agriculture
on Developing Countries
Hannah Yzabel Pingol

10-Garcia

Don’t Have a Cow, Man!

“The meat on your plate is killing the entire planet.”

Animal Agriculture has a bigger effect on the environment than more

commonly known causes like burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. It

contributes a vast array of carbon footprint and consumes 30% of the potable

water on earth (Penn State University, 2016). It is the main cause of different

environmental problems such as global warming, dead zones, melting of polar

ice caps, and the barren Amazon rainforest (Berke, 2018). Contrary to popular

belief, animal agriculture is responsible to a higher rate of carbon emissions

than different types of transportation vehicles such as cars, airplanes, and

buses combined (Capper, 2014). Awareness regarding this issue has been

disregarded due to the influence of multinational companies that produce

meat and dairy products (Development and Cooperation Europe, 2017). In

theory, animal agriculture has the capacity to affect three major sectors of

the environment; namely, water, carbon emissions, and the health of the

people eating its products. Approximately 660 gallons of water are used to
produce one burger from corporations like McDonalds or Burger King (United

States Enviromental Protection Agency, 2012). In terms of water, only 2.5%

of water on Earth can be used for safe consumption. Only 1% of that 2.5%

can be obtained from means such as fresh surface water from specific bodies

of water (United States Bureau of Reclamation, 2017). The other remaining

percent can be obtained from sources or methods such as groundwater or

desalination. These expensive methods can offset the prices given for water

in the long run, considering water shortage problems in places such as

Capetown, South Africa (Stoddard, 2018).

In terms of the effect of animal agriculture on the Earth’s water supply, the

food we eat have a specific water footprint which refers to the amount of

water used to produce the food itself. To be considered sustainable, a

certain type of food must not exceed its weight in liters in terms of water

footprint (Vanham, 2016). The relationship between animal agriculture and

the destruction of the environment lies in the sustainability factor of each

aforementioned sector of the environment. If the process of obtaining food

is unsustainable, this jeopardizes the environment. However, the effect of

animal agriculture in the environment greatly exceeds this definition of

“unsustainable”. In theory, there is a specific amount of carbon emission

that should not be exceeded. In consideration of the rate that we are going,

the Earth can easily exceed this limit through animal agriculture alone, by

2030 (United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, n.d.) As discussed

in the study, developing countries are at a disadvantage in terms of

producing meat and dairy products (United Nations Food and Agriculture

Organization, 2012). First, developing countries are most likely to be in

areas that are susceptible to disasters. One example is the Philippines; since

the Philippines is a developing country, the environmental effects of animal

agriculture can be significantly stronger due to ineffective disaster risk

management measures and the capacity building by the government. The

investigator, acting as a corporation in the Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations, has identified the significance of the

study to be its benefit on the likely effect of animal agriculture in the

current cause of environmental degradation that manifested in different

forms throughout areas in developing countries. Based on my perspective,

the significance of the study serves more than provide assistance to the

current state of how the practice of animal agriculture has affected the

environment collectively. I think this has provided a platform, considering

the scope of reach of a United Nations Organization. The independent

variable in this study is animal agriculture and as a sub-category the

chemicals produced by this process. The effect of this chemicals results in

destruction in the dependent variable, which is the areas of developing

countries. Theoretically, other concepts in this study include the implied

policies that should address these practices as well as the organization of

measures that are supposed to address the effect of the environmental

degradation that was brought about by the process of animal agriculture.

The gaps and conflicts that are identified are the lack of support of

government to the immediate stop of the concept of animal agriculture for

the sake of the environment as of there are many billionaires around the

world that makes animal agriculture as their income, the destruction of the

society comes in the hand of these entrepreneurs who’s only source of living

is through animal agriculture, and though the people would eat less meat ,

the production of animal agriculture won’t be stop immediately nor

forever.Primary sources have been involved in tne given research as the

lack of knowledge of the people that focuses ore on fossil fuels and other

things, but the effects of stoping total pollution would still be present due to

the industry of animal agriculture, almost half of the population doesn’t

know that the meat in their plate is killing our mother earth, as Meat and

Pouktry has a bigger effect on the world than their cars and cigarettes,

Global Warming is a major event that is cause by atmospheric greenhouse

gases that keeps the earth warm.

Three important greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane

(CH4), and nitrous oxide , Animal agriculture is the major contiributor of

these greenhouse gas .

Here are some examples of the problems given in the research (Steinfield,

2012)
 Given that intensification is probably inevitable, how do we reconcile

intensive production with other objectives? – more equitable growth –

other environmental objectives – water, air – animal welfare – healthy

food

 How do we handle the poverty question? • 600 million poor depending

on livestock but intensification not a viable broadbased development

strategy • How to operationalise win-wins? – carbon sequestration in

degraded grasslands – lowering emission intensities while improving

productivity (e.g dairy in Africa, South Asia)

 How to curb demand? • health is a stronger motivation than

environment Are there viable substitutes? • plant protein • non-

vertebrate protein • in-vitro meat

These research problems are therefore a guide to an exploratory study

as of its advance and preventing future problems and issues that

might take place to help save the environment but would not put the

health of the people to risk, as a case that animal agriculture would

vanish for the sake of the environment major changes must be

acquired as we need a replacement for this important nutrients in our

body that would not put the same risk as animal agriculture does to

the planet

Dependent and Independent Variables

Changes in Sustainable
Eliminating
Diet for Living to All
Animal
Humans and better
Agriculture
;Better Health water supply .

As we eliminate animal agriculture, there will be changes in our

dietary plan and the best replacement for meat is vegetables as it also

produce protein, it would cause better health for the humans and

sustainable living for everyone as it is easier to plant vegetables in

your yards than to raise cows and roosters that woud cause you a lot

and a longer period of time to adapt in to, it would reach out to and

extinct global hunger and our water supply would be efficient because

there would be more for humans than animals, the animals that is
exemptified to this project b=would be brought back to their natural

home as this would stop animal cruelty, would be better for the people

, the animals and the environment.

The type of design used to this research is deductive,as used to

deductive reasoning and with the use of scientific method, as it was

piece together to conclude a specific solution to a problem. The

research utilized an in-depth analysis of the related literature

reviewed for the study. In this case, different ideas through multiple

sources were analyzed through deductive reasoning. Adding upon this,

the researcher provided new insights on the effect of animal

agriculture as well as the separate societal implications of this certain

phenomena. Moreover, this instance underlines the possible ways that

a solution to the problem posed by animal agriculture may entail.

Bibliography

Penn State University. (2016, May 3). Water Sustainability and Animal Agriculture. Retrieved

from Penn State University : https://sites.psu.edu/skf5159revisedblogs/2016/05/03/water-

sustainability-and-animal-agriculture/

Steinfield. (2012, Nov 9). Retrieved from dels.nas.edu: http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-

assets/banr/AnimalProductionMaterials/Steinfeld.pdf

Berke, J. (2018, April 7). How eating meat creates a 'dead zone' the size of New Jersey in the

Gulf of Mexico every year. Retrieved from The Business Insider:

https://www.businessinsider.com/eating-meat-affects-environment-dead-zone-2018-4

Capper, J. (2014). Replacing rose-tinted spectacles with a high-powered microscope: The

historical versus modern carbon footprint of animal agriculture. Washington State

University Department of Animal Sciences Journal, 26-32.

Development and Cooperation Europe. (2017, February 25). Controlling our food. Retrieved

from Development and Cooperation Europe: https://www.dandc.eu/en/article/small-

number-multinational-corporations-control-global-food-industry-field-supermarket-shelf

United States Enviromental Protection Agency. (2012, March 22). Virtual Water, Real Impacts:

World Water Day 2012. Retrieved from United States Enviromental Protection Agency:

https://blog.epa.gov/2012/03/22/virtual-water-real-impacts-world-water-day-2012/

United States Bureau of Reclamation. (2017, April 10). Worldwide Water Supply. Retrieved

from United States Bureau of Reclamation: https://www.usbr.gov/mp/arwec/water-facts-

ww-water-sup.html
Stoddard, E. (2018, April 3). Cape Town 'Day Zero' pushed back to 2019 as dams fill up in South

Africa. Retrieved from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-drought/cape-

town-day-zero-pushed-back-to-2019-as-dams-fill-up-in-south-africa-idUSKCN1HA1LN

Vanham, D. (2016). Does the water footprint concept provide relevant information to address the

water–food–energy–ecosystem nexus? Ecosystem Services, 298-307.

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. (n.d.). Prospects for the Environment.

Retrieved from United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization:

http://www.fao.org/3/y3557e/y3557e11.htm

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. (2012). Health and Animal Agriculture in

Developing Countries. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 31-56.