• Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    119
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Interesting that the article thinks 50 to 65 is the boomer generation. Poor Gen X will be forgotten until they are no more.

    I’m definitely represented in this article. I basically don’t buy beef anymore despite being raised with it was the centerpiece of my diet.

    I’ve learned to embrace plant-based alternatives generally find them as enjoyable if not more so than beef.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think of Gen X as people born in the 70s or late 60s, so that age range is pretty much split between X and Boomers imo. They also mention later on that both generations are responsible for similar rates of meat consumption

        • thesmokingman@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think both points still stand! Boomers go to the mid sixties which means the upper range of 50 to 65 covers boomers. However, the bottom range is definitely Gen X and the authors forgot you!

          Having made the mistake of forgetting Gen X in a comment the other day my eyes have been opened.

          • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            the upper range of 50 to 65

            Pretty sure you mean 1950 to 1965; 65 is full boomer and the oldest Gen Xer is roughly 57 now (1966).

            • thesmokingman@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              The article says

              aged 50 to 65—roughly correlating with the baby boomer generation

              My phrasing does seem a bit awkward. I was trying to say “the article uses the age range 50 to 65 and Boomers fall into the upper half of that age range. Gen X is solidly the bottom half of that age range.”

              • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Baby boom began in 1945, after the war when the troops came home.

                The oldest of the baby boom are almost 80.

                Not sure how the article did the math, but…

    • squiblet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Boomers/Old GenX still act like Millennial, a generation in their 30s and 40s, is a word for children or young adults.

  • djsoren19@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Who would have guessed, a generation that is constantly struggling on money can’t buy expensive meat at the same rate the generation that got everything handed to them has been. Who could have known that there were unforseen consequences to economic strategies that have produced one of the greatest period of economic disparity of all time!

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s almost as though massive wealth consolidation and the maintenance of an economic underclass as we prioritise unproductive shareholders over productive workers is bad for the economy.

      Who’d have thought?

  • squiblet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Great, it’s terrible for the environment and fairly insane animal welfare-wise. So it’s cool that we can just stop doing that. The business already doesn’t make economic sense and has been heavily subsidized in various ways by the government for decades. I thought capitalists loved the theory of supply and demand?

  • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    I used to love eating meat, till I had to actually think about ethics beyond “whatever the bible says is right” and recognize that all sentient beings are morally relevant

    • AlataOrange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do you mean sapient? Because plants are also sentient; all sentience is is the ability to react to senses. Sapience on the other hand is the ability to have higher thought, like tool use, teaching, recognizing yourself in a mirror, etc… Finally there is the ability to feel pain which I do not think has a word. Plants from what we can tell cannot process pain, but can process negative stimuli.

      • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        No, to the best of my knowledge plants aren’t sentient. By sentient I mean “the ability to experience feelings and sensations”, which I think is the primary way that word is used. Something could be sentient with no way to react to senses (a paralyzed person for example), or able to “react” to “senses” without experiencing anything (a computer, chemical reaction, or to the best of my knowledge, plants would be examples of this)

        the main reason I don’t think sapient (as you describe it) is a good marker for who/what is morally relevant is that we can likely agree there are pretty obvious cases where sentient, but not sapient, beings are morally relevant. The first example is baby humans, next is adult humans who are not sapient (terrible injury, disability, etc, could lead to a loss or lack of sapience while retaining sentience), and then even for nonhumans I think we can agree that kicking a dog is a morally relevant action (there could be circumstances where it’s justifiable or even good, e.g. kicking them out of the way of a car. But kicking them for fun is wrong)

  • Shirasho@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’ve found a lot of people in my generation (Millennial) don’t eat red meat, not because they don’t want to but because they can’t. It gives me incredible heartburn, and many of my friends become physically ill if they eat it.

          • vivadanang@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            are you suggesting tick-born illness has been weaponized by…? what, the soy milk mafia?

            do you have any idea how staggeringly, mind-numbingly stupid that sounds?

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Are… you stoned? I do have to admit I thought about how vegans would love an airborne version. I read too much science fiction.

          • DigitalPaperTrail@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            jesus, rage bait really does get engagement, doesn’t it? society really is still not prepared against advertisers using it as a tool against us.

            on this specific platform, you poke a few vegans a certain way, or say you love windows, or how much you need to use chrome, or mention china with any sort of opinion one way or another, and everyone comes out the woodworks. and this comment with -5 is on a nested comment in a post with 84 upvotes at the time of this writing, I believe about 20 more from when I made the original comment

            I notice athiests and the fuckcars community are much more chill and less evangelistic here, though, at least

      • stealthnerd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        11 months ago

        Tick bites can cause it. Something about your body building immunity to a protein transferred by the tick that closely matches those found in beef or something like that.

      • SuiXi3D@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s a kind of tick that, once it bites you, causes you to be deathly allergic to red meat from that point forward.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Not always! Last I heard, it can and does wear off. Might take 6-months, might take years. I gather the effect is so rare we don’t have a ton of data.

          But I’m often full of shit! Look it up yourself.

          • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            You are probably full of shit every day. Until you visit the loo. So don’t hold it against yourself!

      • Remmock@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        For a non-tick response- Prion contamination resulting in Mad Cow Disease. One meal and your brain eventually rots in moldy cheese.

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yep, there is, it spreads though tic bites, and once bitten you will allways get sick after eating red meat.

      • someguy3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Alpha-gal syndrome. It’s not that common that it will affect entire populations.

    • zib@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Millennial here and I’ve had a similar experience. I ate a ton of red meat growing up, but once I got to my early-to-mid 30s, I noticed beef would give me a lot of stomach issues. I switched to eating chicken and sometimes (depending on the dish) substituting the meat entirely for black beans and found my stomach issues got a lot better. And it’s still just as tasty to me, so I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything.

      • Kadaj21@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ll usually find that burgers/steaks etc at restaurants are what usually bother me more than if i go and buy/season/cook myself. Not sure if it’s just over seasoned meat, or the type/quality. Even then, I usually prefer chicken or turkey-based (lower fat) alternatives or mixes (like a turkey ground chuck).

        I haven’t really gotten into plant-based alternatives, though I’m not opposed to it…as long as it tastes good! Lol

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          The two go hand in hand. Food service-grade ingredients are notoriously bad and cheap. They then compensate for this by heavily seasoning it so you don’t notice how bad it is. In the rare case that a restaurant uses high quality ingredients (e.g. serving prime rib), they are unlikely to season it as heavily.

    • squiblet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      When I had Celiac undiagnosed, all I could figure out was that I felt awful after meals. My theory was I needed to eat more healthy. I started eating whole and organic foods, which didn’t help, then became a vegetarian, which didn’t help (and some people sure were dicks about it). But yeah, anything that leads to eating more veggies and fiber can help with certain digestive issues and overall health.

    • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t get heartburn, but I also don’t poop for a few days.

      I don’t not eat beef/meat, but I also don’t really eat it either.

  • admiralteal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Only in the Northern hemisphere. Current industry trends indicate some major meat-craving markets gearing up as we speak (e.g., Brazil). Likely a growing demand continues far into the future right now, even if some developed nations are seeing the pendulum swing the other way.

    The problems of meat production on the climate are NOT going to go away on their own.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      China is also driving a lot of the global growth in beef consumption. Any recently industrialized country really

  • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    Just in time for alt-meats to become cost-comparable and palatable enough to compete I’m genX, voting with my dollars for that, despite beef being so delicious

    • Senokir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      The only reason plant based meats haven’t been way cheaper than animal meat the entire time is because of how heavily subsidized the animal agriculture industry is. Without the government literally single handedly propping up the industry it wouldn’t be a viable way to make money.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I used to eat a LOT of red meat, but I have started getting bored with it.

    So now, I am eating more chicken, and most of the red meat I still buy comes from a nice farm shop, I realize it is a luxury, but I can afford it and it is tastier than store bought meat.

  • dumples@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I have stopped eating as much beef mostly for economical reasons. I used to eat steak since I loved it and its easy to cook. However, its now way too expensive to buy casually. I love a good steak at a restaurant so that is mostly the only time I eat it now. That it is bad for my health and the environment are mostly secondary.

    • squiblet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you mean to cook at home, I’ve done well by not caring about the cut and buying whatever is one sale. Not like, old and discounted, but often the stores near me have sales when they have a lot of something or who knows. I bought a 2.2 lb roast for $9 the other day for instance, which is enough for me to eat for days and is even cheaper than ground beef.

      • dumples@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s worthwhile if it’s on sale. Just got to find the right time. Hard to plan around it since you never know when it’s cheap enough.

        Roasts I might start doing more than steaks. Since steaks never go on sale near me

  • ExLisper@linux.community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Am I the only one who doesn’t care for red meat? It’s good but there’s a lot of good food out there. I’d take pizza, sushi or campero with papasa over beef any day. Where’s this obsession with beef coming from? Is it just good marketing?