Worked for a company that was contracted by DOW to make an app promoting some extremely toxic agrochemicals, such as Forefront. They talked about this being so poisonious that if animals eat grass sprayed with it, then crops grown with their manure will be unsuitable for human consumption. Was also asked to fake ("round up") the calculations of how much money you'd save if by those chemicals.
Read up a bit about DOW and the Bopal disaster and started to feel horrible about my work.
Tried to gently bring concerns up with the management, and was laid off immediately.
I feel really bad about doing that work, but trying to make up for it by not eating animal products anymore.
Good idea. I don't really know anything that isn't already out there, but still happy to talk to any journalists/NGOs/regulators about it.
I have been going on about this to a journalist friend of mine who's works at a public broadcaster, but it didn't really go anywhere. Well, at least I'm airing this on HN now.
It's made me wary of wild-camping on grassy areas around farms, knowing what some farmers might be spraying there.
And what if they can tell from the information leaked who leaked it? This person's life will be destroyed by armies of lawyers. Just so some journalist can report on something that'll be out of the news in a few weeks and change precisely nothing.
That is always a risk when someone does something in the public interest. But doing stuff for the betterment of others at risk of your own lifestyle is a noble endeavour that many have undertaken despite these reasons.
My point is that others are not bettered by this action, because the action of leaking to a journalist no longer improves anything. Just as it hasn't the last few times this happened. It is arguably a good idea to sacrifice something for everyone's benefit, but it is always a bad idea to sacrifice if nobody benefits.
Animal husbandry has a large negative impact on the environment. After this DOW Grassland app I felt I needed to take a look at the environmental destruction I'm contributing to.
Except the alternative - ie, relying on annuals for food production - destroys top soil and relies on fossil-based fertilizers. It's the epitome of nonsusteinability and environment destruction.
Perennials combined with animals can be made into a much more self-sustainable cycle.
Be careful with numbers, they can be useful but fail to show the full picture at the same time.
Back when I was eating meat, I was probably still aware that it was harmful, but in a kind of cynical denial about it.
I've heard that one about "the annual crops" before, and it's simply not true that it's "the" alternative. It's claimed in this one study that's echoed in loads of articles[0][1][2][3] that assumes that vegans don't eat perennials, which is kind of ignoring the existence of apples, apricots, asparagus, artichoke, avocados, broccoli, currants, basil, blue- and blackberry, chives, fennel, garlic, ginger, grapes, kale, kiwis, leek, mint, onions, oregano, pears, persimmons, pineapples, plums, pomegranates, potato, rasp- and strawberries, radish, rhubarb, rosemary, sage, thyme, tomatoes for a start.
This view about animal husbandry being harmless for the environment has been disproven[4][5][6], and is on the line with global warming denialism.
It's not a question of being harmless but sustainable. Everything you do will harm or imbalance the environment somehow, the question is how much the environment can recover or if it can at all.
There are a ton of lines I could go to discuss your points, from "meat is not equal to beef" to "could one live healthily only on the things you listed?" (hint: no).
I see tons of articles with statements of journalists but no real evidence, if you want to discuss with references I suggest going to better sources. Actually, I suggest checking your references as well - this was written on [4]:
"[a major report into the environmental impact of meat eating claimed] eating some meat was good for the planet because some habitats benefited from grazing."
So yeah, even your references "disproving" what I'm saying are actually are actually agreeing with me to a certain extent.
Last, but not least, it's not about who eats what but about sustainable systems - either the system works as a cycle or it will eventually run off. You need to look at the bigger picture.
Read up a bit about DOW and the Bopal disaster and started to feel horrible about my work.
Tried to gently bring concerns up with the management, and was laid off immediately.
I feel really bad about doing that work, but trying to make up for it by not eating animal products anymore.