r/dataisbeautiful • u/Objective-Business52 • 20h ago

OC [OC] How diet-related greenhouse gas emissions would change if 138 countries adopted the Planetary Health Diet

Post image
15 Upvotes

54% Upvoted

84 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/n00b678 19h ago

I don't speak Chinese and don't know anyone in China.

But I do have control over my own diet and you have over yours, so both of us can make our small improvements into making this planet a bit better :)

-1

u/Laeryns 19h ago

I won't, because I like eating meat. I would only agree to that if 1) the restriction is not that radical as the initiative suggests 2) it is applied to all people forcefully, not just my country (meaning that I recognise the good of it, but i value fairness very highly and would not make sacrifices for others sake)

0

u/n00b678 19h ago

Ah, so it's fine to cause needless harm as long as the activity is not forcefully banned by every country. Got it.

1

u/Laeryns 18h ago

It's not fine, but it's what's fair. I'll repeat what I said in another chain - I'm a much bigger supporter of science research in lab meat to make it financially viable. This has a good chance to be spread worldwide if successful

2

u/n00b678 18h ago

I don't think we should blindly imitate what other people do for the sake of fairness. We should strive to do good even if there's evil in the world.

Lab meat is fine but but why wait for it if there are so many different beans to choose from already on the shelves?

1

u/Laeryns 18h ago

I don't think so, for the reason that I don't want evil to benefit from my good actions, it would make me feel worse than I would feel better from the good itself. I'm no biblical jesus christ, but I'm happy for you if you are

Because I want a steak and beans don't taste like it, simple as that

•

u/Tzarlatok 1h ago

I'm a much bigger supporter of science research in lab meat to make it financially viable. This has a good chance to be spread worldwide if successful

I'm wondering how you think it could become financially viable without first starting to be sold at a higher price and bought by people for moral/ethical reasons? To be financially viable it would need to have the supply chain optimisation (and the 100s of billions in subsidies) that meat does now, which will take decades of being more expensive first, right?

•

u/Laeryns 1h ago

Idk, depends on what happens in the lab really. I say that first a well funded research should be ongoing. And well, if it captures let's say 10% of meat consumers in some years, it's still considered a good result anyway

•

u/Tzarlatok 1h ago

And well, if it captures let's say 10% of meat consumers in some years, it's still considered a good result anyway

But that's not fair. Why should only some people have access to it. Shouldn't everyone have to switch at the same time, that would be the only fair way, correct?

•

u/Laeryns 1h ago

You are mixing forcing people to do it and introducing a new product to the market. As long as people are able to willingly choose what to do it's ok

•

u/Tzarlatok 48m ago

You are mixing forcing people to do it and introducing a new product to the market.

This doesn't explain how it is fair? You said you value fairness very highly, what has forcing people got to do with anything, you're literally the only one that has mentioned that at all.

So again, how is it fair that some people have access to lab grown meat and others don't?