Having Your Meat and Eating It, Too?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


I do not have a problem recognizing that we are at the top of the food chain – I think that it is no more wrong for us to eat meat than it is for lions or wolves to do so. Of course lions and wolves do not have consciences or ethics that tell them eating meat is wrong, like we do; but perhaps it is not so simple, or even so ideal, for us to deny our animalistic carnivorous natures.

Lions and wolves also do not have the ability to find alternate protein sources, like we do. Yet it is not absolutely clear that these are better for us, or for the planet. Proponents of the paleo diet insist that legumes, including beans and nuts, are full of toxic lectins; paleo message boards and blogs are filled with former vegans claiming that they were at death’s door until they started eating meat again.

Soy can provide us with all of the essential amino acids, but some think that its high phytoestrogen content mitigates its nutritional value. Fish is a terrific source of protein, but our current appetite for it has brought the world’s fisheries to the brink of collapse and severely disturbed the oceans’ ecosystems. And of course dairy and eggs can provide protein – but the animals raised to provide us with dairy and eggs are not treated any better than those raised to provide us with meat.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Although I do not have a problem with the idea of eating meat, I do have a problem with torturing animals to make it cheaper for us to do it - so I pay more to buy meat from animals that have been “humanely and ethically” raised right up until the moment they are slaughtered so I can eat them. I buy from http://kolfoods.com/ and http://growandbehold.com/. I think of this as the truer cost of eating meat; industrially produced meat might cost fewer dollars when I am purchasing it, but I will pay for it in other ways – my health, my conscience, and the state of the environment.

Since the meat I buy is so very expensive, I definitely eat less of it than I otherwise might. Hopefully this ends up being better for my body, the animals I end up eating, and the planet, although it is certainly not better for my wallet. In eating this way I can practice curbing my primal carnivorous nature without completely denying it. But I know that this option is not available to everyone for financial reasons, and that is the crux of the problem we face.

With great power comes great responsibility, right? For better or worse, humans are the lords and stewards of this planet and the animals that inhabit it. While I do think it is within our rights to eat them, I do not think it is not within our rights to treat them cruelly just to save a few bucks.

Image: Robert Joppa, from KOL Foods

Diana Gitig received her Ph.D. in Cell Biology and Genetics from Cornell University's Graduate School of Medical Sciences in 2001. Since then she is a freelance science writer. Diana is based in New York.

More by Diana Gitig

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe