Rethinking Health #2 - Book Summary: Sacred Cow - The Case For (Better) Meat
Book written by: Diana Rodgers, RD and Robb Wolf
Welcome back to Rethinking Health. My name is Ben Williamson and I’m a venture capitalist, recovering corporate attorney, co-founder of a health and fitness facility, an eternal knowledge seeker with a growth mindset, and a connoisseur of all-things health. Rethinking Health is my mission to discuss health, venture capital, innovation, and start-ups within the context of redefining and pursuing preventative population health. If you’re wondering why we’re all here, might I suggest this sorta brief introduction or that you go back and read the first writing here.
Nutrition and food in general are very ideological topics and they are ultimately an n=1 proposition (meaning it's extremely individualized). But with the mainstream popularity and sexiness of highly-processed and lab-created fake meat burgers and other plant-based-meat-substitute companies (especially in the VC/tech world), I believe it's a topic worth discussing. To be fair, this book is an exercise in confirmation bias for me - I eat lots of animal products and feel that it is the best way for the vast majority of the population to eat from a nutrition standpoint. I believe it is supported by available empirical and anecdotal data/evidence and is logical from an ancestral perspective, and also strongly believe that it can also be done responsibly, ethically, and actually benefit the earth. This is a book that I have been anticipating the release of for a long-time (about four years, to be exact), and Diana Rodgers and Robb Wolf did a really fabulous job. The book is absent of zealotry and presents a very reasonable, nuanced, fair, and comprehensive perspective for one simple thing: well-raised meat is good for you and good for the planet. I've decided to attempt to summarize the book, in an effort to make the topic more digestible/accessible and to encourage others to buy and read the book. It's genuinely an excellent book. And it’s an extremely timely book. In addition to the meat alternatives and surrounding narrative, there are two HUGE pressing issues facing our country and the world: a fragile and broken food system and very real climate change. Sacred Cow highlights several damn-good arguments for how regenerative agriculture (which includes cattle) can help fix both of those issues.
I plan to write future essays that look at some of technologies we should be pursuing (rather than lab-grown “meat”) to facilitate a decentralized/unbundled food system, encourage regenerative farming and make it more efficient, easier, and worthwhile for producers, and reduce destructive agricultural practices.
Here is a Quick Summary:
Well-raised meat is good for you and good for the planet.
The book details the nutritional, environmental, and ethical conundrum that has brought us here with meat. Similarly, it also presents (in three respective parts) the nutritional, environmental, and ethical case for meat.
Plant-based protein and meat alternatives (including lab-grown meat alternatives) are popularly seen as "healthier" and better options than meat, but they're actually ultra-processed foods, and are much worse for our health. Additionally, they use highly destructive agricultural practices which require many chemical inputs, ruin soil health, and expand the already-too-big gap between people and their food producers.
We’re told that if we care about our health—or our planet—eliminating red meat from our diets is crucial. But science says otherwise. In the book, they make the case that:
Meat and animal fat are essential for our bodies.
A sustainable food system cannot exist without animals.
A vegan diet may destroy more life than sustainable cattle farming.
Regenerative (100% pasture raised) cattle ranching is one of our best tools at mitigating climate change.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Meat as Scapegoat
PART I: THE NUTRITIONAL CASE FOR BETTER MEAT
Chapter 2: Are Humans Omnivores?
Chapter 3: Are We Eating Too Much Meat?
Chapter 4: Does Meat Cause Chronic Disease?
Chapter 5: Is Meat a Health Food?
Chapter 6: Even if Meat Isn’t Bad for Me, Can’t I Get All My Nutrition from Plants?
PART II: THE ENVIRONMENTAL CASE FOR BETTER MEAT
Chapter 7: What Role Does Livestock Play in Our Environment?
Chapter 8: Can a Sustainable Food System Exist Without Animals?
Chapter 9: Are Cattle Contributing to Climate Change?
Chapter 10: Aren’t Cattle Inefficient with Feed?
Chapter 11: Don’t Cattle Take Up Too Much Land?
Chapter 12: Don’t Cattle Drink Too Much Water?
PART III: THE ETHICAL CASE FOR BETTER MEAT
Chapter 13: Is Eating Animals Immoral?
Chapter 14: Why Did Meat Become Taboo?
Chapter 15: Whey Eat Animals If We Could Survive Only on Plants?
PART IV: WHAT WE CAN DO
Chapter 16: Feeding the World
Chapter 17: Eat Like a Nutrivore
More In-depth Summary:
Meat IS a scapegoat (and has been for a long time). No other food is quite as powerful or polarizing. The feelings we have toward killing animals are deeply entrenched in our culture, and this has influenced ill-advised dietary and environmental policy for decades. This is proven by farmer subsidies and an increased push towards industrial agriculture, among other things. As a result, it’s clear that the row-crop-centric food system is completely embraced by academia, media, and government.
PART 1: NUTRITION
Humans ARE omnivores and we evolved to eat meat. Study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that most hunter-gatherers ate somewhere from 45-65% of their calories from animal foods and the rest from plants. Our ancestors ate much more animal products than us, and humans generally thrive on an omnivorous diet. Meat is good for you, and diets that exclude animal products are risky, especially for kids, moms, and elderly people.
Criticisms of red meat are not based on strong science and the real culprit for growing health issues we're facing are hyper-palatable, ultra-processed modern foods. Since 1970 our intake of beef has actually declined while poultry intake more than doubled. We've increased our intake of caloric sweeteners and our intake of ultra-processed grain products has gone up about 30%. We've tripled our intake of ultra-processed seed oils. We’re not eating too much meat and we’re actually probably eating too little. It's incredibly confusing to determine how much protein to eat and the conventional recommendations aren't really (or at all) based on science. People should likely start with at least 100 grams of protein a day (and aim for at least 30% of their daily calories coming from protein) – but it may be better to shoot for 1 gram per pound of ideal body weight (i.e. a 175-pound man should eat 175 grams of protein a day). Protein is the most satiating macro nutrient. Among other things, intake helps regulate appetite by increasing leptin sensitivity and inducing weight loss and blood sugar control. Higher protein diets also shown to lower blood sugar and blood pressure when compared to cohorts with lower protein. Both low fat and low carb diets can work for people, depending on their specific needs and predisposition, but protein is non-negotiable.
Animal products play a critical role in a healthy omnivore diet, and those who eliminate all animal products can face serious health problems. It can be a huge challenge to get protein and other nutrients we need to thrive without animal products, especially without over-consuming calories and adding countless supplements. There are a multitude of nutrients available in meat that are difficult to get from plants, like Vitamins B and D, Iron, Zinc, Magnesium, and long-chain fatty acids like EPA and DHA. If one was to design a well-balanced diet without any animal products, it would focus on low-glycemic vegetables and protein mostly from soaked legumes; it would not include fake/lab-created “meat” or other highly processed foods. With some effort and a lot of supplements, this could be a nutritious diet for some people, however, we don't have data on how this diet works over several generations of mothers and their children. Totally plant-based diets are certainly not best for all people, and indeed, may be unsafe for most.
Overwhelmingly, the evidence shows that the optimal human diet contains animal products. The studies condemning meat are based on highly biased and flawed observational research and food frequency questionnaires and we definitely don't have the evidence to make public health recommendations to limit meat consumption (including red and processed meat).
PART 2: ENVIRONMENTAL
First, cows do not emit too many greenhouse gases. Proposed environmental solutions are largely divorced from reality, cost (both economic and social), and efficacy. Though we should all share the goal of caring for the environment, a world without livestock is actually not better off. In fact, well-managed cattle can be a net carbon sink, but even in a system where there are slight emissions, the nutritional gains and the added environmental benefits of cattle (increased biodiversity, better water-holding capacity, breaking down non-nutritive food and converting them into a nutrient-rich source of protein and fats) far outweigh the 2 percent global emissions, especially compared to other less nutritious yet higher-emission-producing foods like rice. Studies show that adaptive multi-paddock grazing results in a net Green House Gas sink. The emissions in the finishing stage were more than completely offset by the amount of carbon sequestered in the ground. Also, a brand-new study showing the entire life cycle of 100% grass-fed beef at White Oak Pastures showed net total emissions were the equivalent of minus 3.5 kilograms of CO2 per kilogram of fresh meat.
A grassland, and all the multitude of plants and animals that call it home, can be damaged by either too much or too little stress. Industrial mono-cropping is ruining our soil and if we don’t do something about it, there will be massively detrimental effects. Widespread use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and soil tillage that industrial mono-cropping entails has disastrous ramifications to plant, animal, insect, and microbial populations. Plowing the soil disturbs the connective glue that holds it together and releases carbon into the atmosphere. If topsoil degrades, harvests will likely be negatively affected, which generally involves a "doubling down" on things like synthetic fertilizer which may accelerate the process.
We need to look at how natural systems work and then do our best to support those processes instead of circumventing them. The more diverse and complex and ecosystem is, the healthier and more resilient it is. North America developed such a fertile ecosystem not from farming, but because millions of bison and other ruminants were grazing and fertilizing the soil, driving the solar-fueled process that typifies grasslands. Grasslands need ruminants to be healthy. It’s clear that grazing animals increase biodiversity, both underground and above, and it follows that a field of well-managed cattle is certainly better for the earth than a gigantic plowed field of soy sprayed with chemicals.
Though people think cattle are inefficient with feed, when compared with other animals, cattle actually need less "grain" because most of their lives (even feedlot cattle spend ~2/3 of their life in pastures) are spent grazing on land we can't use for crops. Most of the feed cattle consume doesn't compete with human food. Cows can actually upcycle nutrients by converting grasses and other crop residue to protein which actually makes them extremely efficient animals.
With respect to land use, not all land is usable for cropping. In fact, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimates that approximately 1/3rd of the earth's agricultural land is considered suitable for growing crops. Cattle can graze on land we can't crop, upcycling grass to meat, a nutrient dense food for humans. Ruminants can also be integrating into cropping systems and orchards, which increases fertility and eliminates the need for herbicides, tillage, and nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilizers. So land can be used for both livestock and crops. Once we understand that cattle can not only be made "less bad," but can be produced in a way that creates "more good," the fact that cattle production covers so much land shifts from being seen as a liability to a very material asset.
Similarly, cows really don’t use too much water, relative to other food options. The methodology used to blame cattle for using water is flawed, because it includes rainwater. When looking at so called “blue water” (groundwater), even in conventional systems cattle are equal to or better than many darling crops like almonds, rice, avocados, walnuts, and sugar. In well-managed grazing systems, grazing animals actually improve the water-holding capacity of the soil, preventing rain from running off and driving silt into rivers. In fact, soil health is a massive issue right now that has been largely caused by industrial agriculture. When discussing climate change, we often overlook that healthy soils store carbon. And holistically managed livestock are critical to systems that can build healthy soil and produce healthy food. Other ways to revitalize land include cover crops, using animals for fertilizer, and no-till agriculture. The best thing a farmer can do is increase soil biology and the best way to do that, is by incorporating animals.
The meat-phobic direction of global "sustainability plus health" dietary guidelines is incredibly dangerous, especially because they're written by people who have the privilege to push away a nutrient-dense food like meat (when many do not) and seem to have very little understanding of the multitude of benefits grazing animals have in a truly sustainable food system.
PART 3: ETHICAL
Eating a diet built from grazing animals, fruits, vegetables, and roots and tubers is not only more nutrient dense (healthier) but arguably more ethical because it is more environmentally stable and sustainable. A properly managed food system is one that relies on regenerative food production strategies. It is not only sustainable and healthy, but it also reduces death and suffering. There are undeniably legitimate animal welfare concerns with how some producers, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO), and slaughterhouses handle farmed animals. But eliminating meat means we would rely on an industrial, synthetic chemical row-crop-centric model.
Perhaps the most pressing problem for sustainability is that the vast majority of Westernized populations have become divorced from nature. We see nature as a place to visit, not as a system we are a part of. Most of us are entirely removed from how our food is produced. Most people have never hunted, fished, or processed an animal. When people give up grazing animals and shift more to eating factory-raised chicken and meatless burgers, they're actually propping up a system that is destroying our topsoil and, ultimately, ending more lives. When people give up grazing animals and shift more to eating factory-raised chicken and meatless burgers, they're actually propping up a system that is destroying our topsoil and, ultimately, ending more lives. Though encouraged in today’s industrial system, CAFO chicken, farmed fish, and lab-grown meat are fundamentally unsustainable. Animal death is a by-product of plant production (and industrial agriculture) which destroys animal habitat, requires tilling the soil which kills small animals, uses pesticides which kill insects and poison the animals that eat them, creates soil water runoff into local rivers and streams, and harvests crops which once again kills and displaces small mammals.
Conversely, well-managed cattle increase wildlife populations, improve ecosystem health, increase the water-holding capacity of the soil, and sequester carbon. Killing one well-raised cow that lived on pasture is actually causing FAR less death than the number of animal lives that are lost by modern row-cropping techniques. When we refuse to accept how nature works, and try to eliminate animals from our food system, our food system will collapse. Lab meat, fake meat, and other "clean" proteins are not, in fact, better options. Instead, photosynthesis, regenerating the soil, respecting natural cycles, and increasing biodiversity should be the answer.
PART 4: WHAT CAN WE DO?
If our food system (1) makes people so sick that their healthcare costs bankrupt global economies, and (2) destroys are topsoil such that we can effectively no longer produce food, then it is, by definition, unsustainable. In addition to considering the food production potential of a given approach, we must also look at energy considerations and the often-overlooked externalizes of these processes.
The first major shift needs to be from reductionism to a more holistic approach. Even looking at a "reduction in emissions" as a goal is, as we've illustrated, missing the nutritional and overall ecosystem benefits we see from well-managed ruminant animals grazing on un-croppable land. On a policy level, we need to incentivize farmers to increase ecosystem health and pursue regenerative farming. Next, resilient food systems on a regional level that are less reliant on fossil fuels, chemicals, and other outside imports are necessary to create a stable system. We need a food sovereignty movement that encourages a "bottom up" approach based on local food and production. Individually, people can keep their dollars local, live within their means (to not generate waste), get more involved with their food, contribute to regenerative agriculture organizations, teach their kids how real food is grown, and follow a healthy lifestyle.
In closing, we as a people are overweight and metabolically broken, our small towns are dying, and we're ruining our soil. We must deemphasize global monocropping and pay more attention to soil health, water use, and nutrient-rich food instead of human "feed". conversely, we must emphasize regional reliance while leveraging central distribution when and where it makes sense. In the end, the real threat to human health and the planet is industrially produced food, not cows or animal husbandry. It’s not the cow, it’s the how.
If you enjoyed this post, please share! If you enjoy this page, please subscribe! And if you want to learn more about Sacred Cow and the Case for Better Meat, you can here.