…”than being vegan”? Look, I don’t care if you’re vegan and not and I’ll respect you if you are, but the title already makes this article sound biased and untrustworthy.
To add on to this, the title should really end with, “than being vegetarian”, or else the title should be " Consuming animal products creates four time more greenhouse gases than being vegan,…"
It’s not really a 1 to 1 comparison if you’re comparing a meat eater with someone who doesn’t consume milk, meat, eggs, or any other animal products. You can also have meat eaters that don’t consume milk due to allergies and such.
Plus, technically speaking (with cultured meat on the rise), there could be vegans that aren’t vegetarian, as vegans could still eat cultured meat.
…”than being vegan”? Look, I don’t care if you’re vegan and not and I’ll respect you if you are, but the title already makes this article sound biased and untrustworthy.
So triggered, so fast.
Study of greenhouse gas emission of different alimentation choices finds an expected result
This is not how biases work, every result you don’t like doesn’t make the study biased
To add on to this, the title should really end with, “than being vegetarian”, or else the title should be " Consuming animal products creates four time more greenhouse gases than being vegan,…"
It’s not really a 1 to 1 comparison if you’re comparing a meat eater with someone who doesn’t consume milk, meat, eggs, or any other animal products. You can also have meat eaters that don’t consume milk due to allergies and such.
Plus, technically speaking (with cultured meat on the rise), there could be vegans that aren’t vegetarian, as vegans could still eat cultured meat.
Titel translation is “Eating something creates more greenhouse gasses than being something.”
So… “Eating meat creates more greenhouse gasses than being meat.”
“Eating grass creates more greenhouse gasses, than being grass.”