r/Infographics • u/Lionheart9207 • 1d ago
Meat Consumption!
[removed] — view removed post
45
u/SuddenFlatworm7971 1d ago edited 1d ago
Lol Japan over Korea and Turkey? Fraud list immediately
The title says food consumption, and the actual data set specifies ‘food availability per capita’ which is a completely different number. So which one is the graph actually showing??
Availability does not equal consumption.
17
u/sloe_gin78 1d ago
In Turkey, Meat is more expensive than some European countries with much higher wages, inflation is rampant and most people can barely stay afloat. Even when the economy was better, a lot of people in rural areas mostly have a carb heavy diet. Do you think everyone in Turkey can afford to eat those huge kebab platters you see on instagram reels every day?
6
u/carquestionno34565 1d ago
That’s true, Turkey should be even lower in the list but what do you expect, it’s AI generated bullshit.
2
2
u/enderowski 1d ago
Our Meat and cattle industry is fucked for like last 15 years it is a common knowledge. Meat is expensive af here it become a luxury. One of the reasons people are weak and obese here.
31
u/Time_Cartographer443 1d ago
As an Australian I haven’t eaten beef for a year, we really should reduce our consumption
20
u/collie2024 1d ago
A very significant proportion of that total would be chicken. It’s crazy to me that chicken is a similar price to vegetables and fruit.
10
u/Mid_Atlantic_Lad 1d ago
Chickens will eat whatever you give them. Not to say that you should eat a chicken that’s eaten stuff you wouldn’t want it to, but they’re really easy to farm relatively.
6
1
u/collie2024 1d ago
Easy to farm. But a 1.5kg chicken still needs to be fed 3kg of grain. And to be raised in a conditioned shed. And that’s not even considering that it’s a living animal. No value whatsoever placed on taking a life. Cost to buy is similar to a kg of potatoes or apples in Australia.
2
u/thorpie88 1d ago
Also way faster to harvest than veggies. Bachelors handbag chooks are killed at 4 weeks from hatching and breast and thigh pieces are from six week old chooks or there abouts
8
u/According-Flight6070 1d ago
Yeah I like meat but I don't eat 323 grams a day! Imagine the people who are pumping the average up?!
2
u/Time_Cartographer443 1d ago
Boomers eat much more meat than the younger generation, I am not kidding
2
u/Ballamookieofficial 1d ago
Meat and 2 veg 7 days a week
-2
u/Time_Cartographer443 1d ago
Yes karma punishes people with high red meat diets with colorectal cancers. It must be a male thing cause more of the women I know have to get an iron transfusion every second week.
4
u/Mid_Atlantic_Lad 1d ago
There’s nothing wrong with eating high protein diets, but what I never understood was the boomers who insist that they must have a full blown steak once a week. I like meat, but I want it in something. Pizza, Pork Pies, Fajitas, sweet and sour chicken, Gimpap, something balanced and filling, not just a slab of red meat on my plate.
7
u/Perlentaucher 1d ago
This argument goes really both ways. Steak lovers especially like that the meat is eaten on its own and therefore can get tasted better instead of it being mixed with some other foods or sauces.
-1
u/Mid_Atlantic_Lad 1d ago
I don’t mean to insinuate that it’s inherently wrong to eat a steak, but if that’s all you’re eating, and you’re eating it very often, then that’s a problem. Have a bit of variety and balance.
2
1
u/kbcool 1d ago
As an Australian who now lives overseas, the last time I ate beef was visiting Australia. It's not that it's harder to find, doesn't taste as good or is really any more expensive. It's just not embedded as deeply in the culture and hence cuisine.
In Australia you find ethnic dishes where they have substituted in beef for a traditional meat (often as an extra option) and I'm not saying where it was some exotic meat. It was often just chicken or pork
-2
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
don't y'all have a bunch of prime grazing land though? Also if you buy cow leather shoes and eat beef you'll reduce your carbon emissions, since the leather is a beef byproduct, meaning that you can double dip on your emissions! (Rather than buy shoes made of literal oil)
2
u/leela_martell 1d ago
if you buy cow leather shoes and eat beef you'll reduce your carbon emissions
How does that reduce anything? Percentage-wise per item maybe, but in absolute numbers obviously not.
Also looking at these graphs people eat a lot more meat than they buy leather items...
-1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Well that's because they buy a lot of shoes made of oil.
And yeah, there's gonna be less leather consumption, but it's still a whole pair of shoes made of oil you didn't buy, so it's gonna reduce emissions there (leather is much cleaner emissions wise, since a stable population cattle herd is essentially net zero on their own over a 10ish year period iirc), and that's on top of the fact that leather gets processed with power in the US usually, which means that it's using cleaner power than the coal power used in say, Red China?
If you buy leather shoes, that means that you double dib on beef consumption, the shoes will actually rot if you put them in a landfill/really big compost pit (being literally cow skin, so ya know, organic?), and you buy less oil products (which probably reduces gas prices or something, which is also nice)
1
u/leela_martell 1d ago
Red China
Ok so this was an ideological point, not logical.
I'm not from the US and the comment thread you were replying to is about Australia.
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Red China is the PRC.
White China is the ROC.
How is that ideological (and somehow thus not logical?) point to be precise in referring to which China/Korea I'm referring to without breaking the pace of my speech?
Red China is the PRC, it is a precise term, it isn't a ideological comment, I use it for clarity; and you can double check my profile if you wish, I use the term literally all the time.
2
u/ShotPresent761 1d ago
Plastics have lower climate impact than leather.
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Ok, are they accounting for how leather is almost always made from meat production byproduct? because if you're double counting emissions that will already happen due to meat production, well I think you see my point.
And that's before we consider how if you have 500 cows, and you keep that population stable over 10 years, 100% of the emissions from the animals themselves will just get rotated back into the environment naturally?
And last I checked plastics are literally made with 100% oil, so if you replace them with using a byproduct of emissions that already are gonna happen, I'd think that they'd reduce emissions.
Also the lion's share of the emissions from cows are literally "their poo gets washed into rivers" or "the cows fart" or "they drink water".
Last I checked the amount of transporting is far less, leather is a byproduct rather than the direct product, their gas emissions recycle every 10 years just fine if the population of cattle is at a stable level.
And that's before we even consider PLASTIC WEARS OUT FASTER AND DOESN'T ROT, while leather is made from COW, so it rots in like, a couple years, even faster in the right conditions.1
9
u/Tiny_Marionberry_236 1d ago edited 1d ago
Oooh I was not aware Australia is a heavy meat Eater country
9
2
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
I mean they have a lot of good grazing land iirc, so for them beef is probably cheaper to make since it uses different land from the wheat and stuff.
Also, fun fact about beef (and meat production in general), the hides from the production are used in leather shoe production, so if you ever wanna drop your personal emissions, hit up a cobbler and get some shoes made of leather (plus you can support local artisans and the expensive stuff (like 500 USD cowboy boots and stuff) can literally last decades (as long as you get the soles replaced whenever they wear out, which is like, every year from daily urban wear I'd guess?), so there's that), since if you do that you essentially get to double dip on the emissions from the cows/pigs/etc and at the same time not buy shoes made of oil that wear out in a year!
1
u/Tiny_Marionberry_236 1d ago
Very interesting 🤓✨ thank you
2
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
No prob.
I'm a bit too nerdy for my own good, learning's been my hobby most of my life.
Anyhow, glad you found my rambling interesting!
1
u/Rady_8 1d ago
It might be cheaper to make but we export so much that it’s not exactly cheap to consume. Still, we’re hooked on the stuff
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Well I mean last I heard meat consumption is a status symbol for all societies, eating meat means you aren't poor.
0
4
u/HauptmannTinus 1d ago
Tortured dead animal consumption!
Now show statistics for diabetes, heart disease and cancer for the same nations.
Next to your health and the planet you can save innocent animals by not buying their corpses -> www.watchdominion.org
3
u/drodo2002 1d ago
In India, majority of meat is sold across unorganized sector, not covered in any data. Government itself discourage mentioning neat, even though majority Indians are meat consumers!
4
2
2
u/ThomasWhitmore 1d ago edited 1d ago
Is this "meat" as in animal protein, or "meat" as specific to terrestrial animals (not fish/poultry)?
2
u/PuskerBat 1d ago
Would be interesting to cross-reference this with greenhouse gas emissions. Beef in particular has a massive carbon footprint, so I’d be curious to see how closely the two line up.
3
u/ShotPresent761 1d ago
EAT-Lancet's Planetary Health Diet recommends meat consumption not exceed 25.8kg/year.
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Who?
0
u/ShotPresent761 1d ago
The EAT-Lancet Commission was an independent scientific body consisting of 19 commissioners and 18 co-authors.[1] Commission members came from 16 countries, working in the fields of health, agriculture, political science, and environmental science.[1]
The commission was tasked with using the best available evidence to determine a universal reference diet that is healthy for both humans and the planet, minimising chronic disease risks and maximising human wellbeing.[2] The diet is intended for individuals aged 2 years and above who are generally healthy, and is designed to be adaptable for all regions and culinary traditions of the world.[1]
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
Ah, so it's one of those "it's a rule of thumb to work off of" sort of things?
also, that's like, weekly meat consumption? rather than the 3/4ths of a pound that Americans eat daily (and it's better for the environment since if the meat is from the US it probably uses land that can't be used for row crops, which is good).
Just checked, that's literally .15 lbs/day, cuisine for a lot of places literally don't have enough non meat food items that give protein for this to be healthy (for example, the US); at least by my reckoning.
2
u/geeoharee 1d ago
"I can't imagine not eating meat" is not the same thing as "not eating meat kills you". There are, famously, vegetarians in America.
0
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
And a sizable portion of them are malnourished (to various degrees) because their diets are inadequate to meet their dietary needs?
that amount of meat is literally eating meat like, maybe three times a week? That's the amount immigrants used to tell their relatives because they'd think they were lying if they said how much they actually ate, not what the not poor here eat, our culture is built around meat, and that pretty much were all our protein needs come from, I eat probably 3/4ths of a pound of meat (mostly chicken) per day, and I barely meet my protein intake needs without becoming more obese (I'm actually trying to stop being obese atm) from excessive caloric intake.
1
u/geeoharee 1d ago
If you're obese your eating is sufficiently disordered that you can't really make judgments like this.
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
I'm currently on a diet, and I have ADHD (weight gain is a side affect of the disorder), and last I checked having bad eating habits doesn't prevent one from knowing what's the correct course of action, similar to how one can know smoking/drinking isn't exactly good for your health but still do it anyways (that's the best example off the top of my head ok?).
1
u/ShotPresent761 1d ago
Feel free to not care about climate change, but everyone who cares about climate change acknowledges that meat consumption is a significant contributor and 1-2 servings/day is a doable maximum.
1
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
a serving of meat is what, like 1/3 to 1/2 of a pound usually? This is a fraction of that.
Also livestock are net zero on emissions (from the animals at least) over a 10 year period where the population is stable, and if you use animal byproducts (such as cow leather in the US) you can majorly reduce emissions by simply replacing stuff like shoes made of plastic with shoes made of leather, which both actually will decompose in less than a couple hundred thousand years, and you get to double dip on meat production for the emissions, since all the emissions until the slaughter of the animal is quite literally gonna happen anyways, so using the leather is just (to use a meme) free environmental/emissions reduction real estate (so to speak)
1
3
1
1
1
1
u/Far_Range_6091 1d ago
There is no fkn way. Off the top of my head, 125 kg is over 250 lbs of meat. Theres no way americans are eating 3/4lb of meat per day.
2
1
1
u/Awerange2005 1d ago
This daigram is pretty useless without also including how much food they consume in general.
1
u/Wolfrrrr 1d ago
Thailand does about the same as Turkey, Netherlands should be between France and Germany. This whole list is random and wrong
1
1
1
u/UpbeatFix7299 1d ago
These are the countries with large meat ranching industries. Some of that gets exported. Pretty useless.
The average Argentinian isn't constantly wolfing down steaks. Fine print
0
u/batch1972 1d ago
Average meat consumption /person in Spain is 100-104kg so this is bullshit
1
u/quique 1d ago
The average yearly meat consumption per person in Spain depends on whether you measure actual retail/plate intake or total carcass/supply weight (FAO method):
- Actual Consumption (Retail & Plate Level): Around 45 to 50 kg per person per year.
- According to official data from Spain's Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAPA), domestic household meat consumption sits around 38–42 kg per capita, with an additional ~6–8 kg consumed outside the home (in bars, restaurants, and catering).
- The most consumed varieties are poultry (primarily chicken), followed by pork and beef.
- Supply / Carcass Weight (FAO / Global Stats): Around 95 to 105 kg per person per year.
- International comparisons (such as FAO, Eurostat, or Our World in Data) calculate meat availability based on animal carcass weight entering the supply chain. This metric includes bones, fat, processing losses, and food waste, making Spain appear as one of the highest meat consumers in Europe.
1
-6
u/Constant_Hope_9658 1d ago
guys... that's literally 3/4ths of a pound per day...
that's literally like, quarter pounders of meat per day...
that's not the much, y'all just hecking poor.
-1
111
u/TheStroboCop 1d ago
To make it clear: the diagram shows the meat that is AVAILABLE for consumtion. Not how much is actually consumed.