Summary
Grass-fed beef is often marketed as a healthy, eco-friendly, and ethical option for red meat-eaters. Is grass-fed really better than conventionally-raised beef? And can it be good for your health and the planet?
Picture a lush meadow. Bright green and dewy at sunrise, warm and comfy in the late afternoon. The sight could inspire a lot of feelings, but the munchies probably aren’t one of them. People don’t eat grass because we can’t turn its cellulose into usable calories.
Cattle, on the other hand, perform this metabolic magic trick with ease. Because they’ve evolved an organ called a rumen (a 45-or-so-gallon fermentation tank, which you and I lack), they convert the grass under the hooves into their own flesh.
The livestock industry originally was a way to use “middle cows” (and other ruminant animals like sheep, goats, deer, and moose) to make prairie calories available to humans. But times have changed, and so have the diets of industrially-raised cows. In the U.S., about 97% of the cows raised for beef spend the end of their lives in feedlots, where they’re fed corn and soy instead of their natural diet of grasses.
There are two big problems with this arrangement.
First, cattle are not suited to consume corn or soybeans, just like we’re not set up to eat grass. As a result, they convert it into themselves, that is, into our meat, quite inefficiently. Since it takes about 14 pounds of grain or soy to make a pound of feedlot-derived beef (I’ll break down the math on this later), we actually get far less food out than we put in.
We’ve essentially created a protein factory in reverse. And we do this on a massive scale, while nearly 650 million people on our planet face hunger, and over 2 billion experience moderate or severe food insecurity.
Second, land that’s used to grow corn and soy for cattle isn’t available for other uses such as growing healthy produce for humans, wild pastureland, or forest.
Around the world, institutions are converging on the same advice. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is calling on humanity to eat less meat to help slow climate change. The American Heart Association and the National Cancer Institute urge people to eat less red meat, or none, to help fight heart disease and cancer. Health Canada’s national food guide now tells Canadians to choose plant-based proteins more often.
The Rise of Grass-fed Beef
Despite the calls for consumers to eat less meat to fight environmental harms, as well as research showing that red meat isn’t doing your health any favors, Americans still eat about 58 pounds of beef per person a year. And some of that beef is being sold as “grass-fed,” at a 30% to 50% price premium. (Translation: it’s expensive.)
Advocates for grass-fed beef say it has health and environmental benefits. Marketers and enthusiasts point to its protein, B vitamins, iron, and other nutrients. And some environmentalists tell us that properly managed grass-fed beef could help sequester carbon in the ground, helping fight climate change while restoring topsoil.
Some consumers are heeding the call. The market-research firm Future Market Insights valued the global grass-fed beef market at about $13.6 billion in 2025 and projected it to pass $21 billion by 2035. It attributed this expected growth to shoppers who are both health-conscious and interested in animal welfare and environmental sustainability.
Are those good reasons, or is it industry hype? Do the health claims ring true, or is this a case of people looking for, in the words of the late doctor John McDougall, “good news about their bad habits”? Are the sustainability benefits real, or is it just greenwashing to soothe the conscience of a bunch of environmentally conflicted burger-lovers? Is grass-fed beef really good for you, the animals, and the environment? Will it save our topsoil and reverse climate change? And at the very least, is it better than conventional beef?
Let’s roll up our sleeves and investigate.
What Is Grass-fed Beef?
Before the 1950s, grass-fed beef was just called “beef.” That was the way meat cattle were raised. Cattle got to live longer back then, sometimes reaching their third birthdays. For context, the natural lifespan of cattle typically extends 15–20 years. The oldest known cow, Big Bertha, reached her 49th year on a farm in County Kerry, Ireland. (Apparently, Bertha wasn’t averse to a shot of whiskey now and then, which is irrelevant to this article but I couldn’t pass up the chance to share that tidbit.)
In the mid-20th century, as hamburgers and fast food grew in popularity in the U.S., farmers and ranchers needed a way to fatten steers faster, so they started feeding them energy-dense grain and soy instead of grass.
Today, most cattle in the U.S. start out eating grass, but are fattened, or what the industry euphemistically calls “finished,” on grain and soy for their last 160–180 days of life. While this accounts for barely a third of their lifespan, more than half of their weight gain occurs during this final half-year. Steers that are fattened up in these concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) reach their slaughter weight in around 15 months.
Because nearly every steer eats grass for the first stretch of its life, until it weighs 600 to 800 pounds and gets shipped to a feedlot, the words “grass-fed” on a package can be perfectly true of an animal that spent its last half-year eating corn. The term that means what most people assume is 100% grass-fed.
One hundred percent grass-fed cattle, on the other hand, feed on grass and other forage for their entire lives. Since the grass they eat is much less calorie-dense than feedlot grain, they’re sent to slaughter later, usually between 18 months and 2 years old. Their average weight at slaughter is about 1,200 pounds, compared with about 1,400 pounds for feedlot cattle.
Less than half of that weight is edible meat. Most of it is hoof, hide, bone, excess fat, and other inedible body parts. Since grass-fed cattle carry less fat and grow proportionally larger digestive organs than their grain-fed cousins, their weight-to-meat ratio is even lower.
Is Grass-Fed Beef Better than Conventional Beef?
We’ve seen some of the claims that grass-fed beef is better than conventional beef. What does the evidence say? Let’s take a look at the three main areas where grass-fed beef is said to be a better option: nutrition, the environment, and the treatment of animals.
Grass-Fed Beef Nutrition
Before comparing the two, it’s worth being straight about what beef offers. A 4-ounce serving provides around 19 grams of protein, iron and zinc in forms the body absorbs more readily than their plant equivalents, creatine, and a substantial dose of vitamin B12, which plant foods don’t reliably provide on their own (strictly plant-based eaters get it from fortified foods or a supplement). It also comes with a hefty dose of saturated fat, a small amount of naturally occurring trans fat, and no fiber.
We could argue until the cows come home about whether red meat has a net health benefit, and if so, for whom. But the question here is narrower: Does grass-fed deliver a better nutritional profile than feedlot beef? Mostly a little, and mostly not enough to matter much.
Proponents tell us that grass-fed beef contains roughly 3 times more omega-3 fatty acids than grain-fed beef. And it’s true. But according to research from Texas A&M University, this “superior” amount is still nutritionally negligible.
A 4-ounce grass-fed patty provides only about 55 milligrams of the omega-3 alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), which is just 3% to 5% of the daily recommended intake (1,100 milligrams for women, 1,600 milligrams for men). By comparison, a single tablespoon of ground flaxseed contains over 2,300 milligrams; the same amount of chia seeds provides roughly 1,800 milligrams; and an ounce of walnuts tops the charts at about 2,600 milligrams.
Fatty fish supply the more bioactive long-chain omega-3s EPA and DHA directly: a 100-gram cooked serving provides anywhere from roughly 900 milligrams (trout, sardines) to just over 2,000 milligrams (anchovy, herring, salmon), depending on species. Even a single tablespoon of canola oil provides over 1,400 milligrams. Next to sources like these, the omega-3s in beef barely register. Grass-fed may have three times as much as conventional, but three times a very small number is still a very small number.
When it comes to vitamins and minerals, grass-fed beef has more vitamin E and more beta-carotene (which the body converts to vitamin A), though again, the amounts are small. A serving provides only a few percent of the daily need either way.
Both grain- and grass-fed beef supply substantial amounts of iron and zinc. Iron is modestly higher in grass-fed beef (about 2.3 vs. 1.9 milligrams per 100 grams), while zinc results are inconsistent: one large survey found no difference, and a smaller controlled study found more in grass-fed beef.
Grass-fed beef contains a bit more water and a bit less fat than CAFO beef, but the protein levels are similar, delivering around 19 grams per 4-ounce serving of 80% lean ground beef.
On the Negative Side
On the negative side, grass-fed beef tends to contain more trans fats that occur naturally in cattle, though these differ from the industrial trans fats once common in fried and processed foods, and evidence that they harm health at typical intakes is weak.
And then there’s cancer. Red meat of all kinds, including grass-fed beef, is labeled a Group 2A carcinogen by the World Health Organization, meaning that it’s “probably cancer-causing” to humans.
Recent research also suggests that red meat, grass-fed or not, promotes the body’s production of a compound called TMAO, which can contribute to heart disease and other chronic lifestyle diseases.
And all red meat can cause foodborne illness due to contamination by pathogenic bacteria that can sneak into meat during processing, grinding, and packaging. While the risk of dangerous bacterial contamination from grass-fed beef is lower than from cattle that have been crammed into feedlots, it’s still not zero.
Because of the ethical considerations we’ll discuss below, I wish I could tell you that grass-fed beef was a huge health improvement. Personally, I think modern factory farms are something of an ethical abomination. But at this point, I’m not aware of any long-term scientific evidence proving that eating it translates to better health outcomes than CAFO beef.
Is Grass-Fed Beef Good for the Environment?
Grass-fed beef is sold as good for the planet as well as good for you. But it doesn’t make sense to talk about “good” in a vacuum; the question is always, “compared to what?” Most of the existing evidence answers the question, “Is grass-fed beef better than feedlot beef?” So let’s start there.
Is Grass-Fed Beef Better Than Feedlot Beef?
First, the baseline. Conventional beef is, not to put too fine a point on it, a raging environmental dumpster fire. It’s one of the most climate-damaging industries on the planet. According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, livestock produced about 6.2 billion tonnes of CO2-equivalent in 2015, roughly 12% of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, with cattle responsible for 62% of that.
Some experts argue that this still understates the damage because it ignores the opportunity costs of using the land responsibly. And as we saw earlier, feedlot cattle turn grain and soy into beef very inefficiently. After cattle arrive at a feedlot, they gain enough weight to produce about 1 new pound of beef for every 14 pounds of feed input. From a meat perspective, the other 13 are essentially wasted.
Here’s the math behind that number. Feel free to skip ahead if the details of hot carcass weight and dressing percentage in cattle farming aren’t your cup of beef.
A steer typically enters a feedlot weighing between 600 and 800 pounds. According to Penn State Extension, bringing a 600-pound calf to a finished weight of 1,400 pounds requires approximately 5,000 pounds of feed (measured on a dry-matter basis). According to yield data from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, a 1,400-pound steer yields about 570 pounds of boneless, trimmed retail beef.
But not all of that beef is the result of feedlot dining. The animal already carried meat on its frame when it arrived. Applying standard dressing and retail yield percentages to a 600-pound steer suggests it would have yielded roughly 215 pounds of boneless, trimmed beef if slaughtered at arrival weight. (This estimate is adjusted downward slightly to reflect that younger, leaner animals yield a smaller percentage of retail beef.)
That means the finishing phase adds approximately 355 pounds of retail beef.
Dividing 5,000 pounds of feed by 355 pounds of added beef gives roughly 14 pounds of feed per pound of new retail beef produced during the finishing period.
The beef industry publishes radically different figures. But they count every pound of weight gain, including bone, hide, and fat that never reaches your plate. And they count the weight the steer had gained during its first 6 to 12 months of life, too. I count only the beef you can actually eat, that was actually added while in the CAFO, because that’s the food the feed is turned into.
Since grass-fed cattle don’t eat grain or soy, they avoid the fertilizer, the fuel, and the forest-clearing for soybean fields that go into feedlot rations. That’s a clear advantage.
If the pasture is well-managed, grass-fed cattle may improve soil quality, both in fertility and in its ability to store carbon (and thus fight climate change). By well-managed, most experts mean rotational grazing; more precisely, “adaptive multi-paddock grazing.” Basically, cattle move frequently between small paddocks, allowing a rest-and-recovery cycle. This lets grazed areas regenerate, encouraging grasses to rebuild deeper root systems. Those roots feed soil microbes and deposit organic matter underground, producing soil that is healthier, more water-retentive, and richer in carbon.
In two life-cycle analyses, rotational grazing performed well:
- Midwest. A Midwest trial found that this kind of grazing built enough soil carbon to turn emissions from the finishing phase negative.
- Georgia. At White Oak Pastures, counting soil carbon put the farm’s footprint 66% below conventional beef.
Other studies show less promising results. A 2018 meta-analysis found that rotational grazing held more soil carbon than continuous grazing but didn’t differ significantly from ungrazed land. The gains are front-loaded, with sequestration slowing after 5–20 years, so it may not be a long-term solution. Also, in some parts of the world, rotational grazing has been shown to be less effective.
The boldest version of this idea comes from Allan Savory, the Zimbabwean ecologist behind “holistic planned grazing,” who argued in a widely viewed TED talk that cattle managed his way could reverse desertification and climate change. It’s a hopeful claim, and a big reason some environmentalists champion grass-fed beef. But a 2014 review could find no peer-reviewed studies showing the method outperforms conventional grazing, and found that nearly all the supporting evidence comes from the Savory Institute itself or from testimonials by ranchers already committed to the approach. A separate review from Chalmers University reached the same verdict, and found the Institute’s assumed rate of carbon storage roughly seven times higher than what’s actually been measured on improved grazing land.
Some ranchers are working hard to improve the outcome. They’re rotating herds, rebuilding soil, refusing confinement and routine antibiotics, and accepting slower growth and thinner margins. They deserve our respect and our gratitude. There are good reasons to choose 100% grass-fed from ranchers like the ones described above over feedlot products. But at the end of the day, so-called regenerative beef hasn’t yet lived up to the hype. And it has some real problems, too.
What About the Environmental Disadvantages of Grass-Fed Beef?
Let’s start with cattle farts. Actually, cattle burps, which is where nearly all the methane comes from (but isn’t as good for a laugh).
Livestock systems account for roughly a third of human-caused methane emissions, and cattle are the largest single source. By weight, methane contributes 27 to 30 times more to climate change than carbon dioxide over 100 years, because it absorbs a lot more energy.
Since grass is more fibrous than grain, grass-fed cattle may belch even more methane than feedlot cattle. And because they take longer to reach slaughter weight, they produce that methane for longer, too.
Research consistently shows that soil carbon gains from even well-managed grazing typically don’t fully offset those ongoing emissions. Rotational grazing is definitely better than continuous or intensive grazing: It restores degraded land, improves ecosystem health, and delivers real, if partial and temporary, climate benefits. But at best it’s an improvement, not a solution.
Another disadvantage of grass-fed beef is the amount of land it requires. Because grass-fed cattle grow more slowly, the industry needs land longer to produce a pound of beef. Studies show that grass-fed beef steers require between 2 and 2.5 times as much land as those finished in feedlots.
So which is better?
The case for grass-fed rests almost entirely on soil carbon. Without it, grass-fed beef’s footprint is greater than conventional beef. And as we’ve seen, those gains slow and may even reverse over time.
A broader analysis is less kind. A 2025 study in PNAS modeled a wide range of U.S. grass-fed operations, from dry rangelands to lush, intensively managed pastures. Even the most efficient one produced 10–25% more emissions per kilogram of protein than industrial beef. And even when the researchers gave grass-fed beef maximum credit for storing carbon in the soil, it came out no better than feedlot beef.
Ideally managed rotational grazing may offer stronger carbon sequestration benefits, but most grass-fed beef is not produced this way. And cattle managed through unrestricted grazing produce a significantly larger climate footprint per pound of beef.
There’s a bigger question underneath all of this. Even where grazing land does bank carbon, that might not be the best use of that land. Convert the same acreage to woodland, and you store considerably more, because trees usually hold far more carbon than pasture. This is the opportunity cost we mentioned at the start: The climate math for beef changes once you ask not just what a pasture emits, but what that land could have been doing instead.
For more ways land can capture carbon, see the eight solutions in this article. (Spoiler: the word “beef” does not appear.)
What’s the Environmental Impact of Grass-Fed Beef Compared to Other Foods?
The 2025 PNAS study found that even the most efficient grass-fed beef is 3 to over 40 times more carbon-intensive than a wide range of plant and animal alternatives. A 2011 Environmental Working Group analysis found that beef produces about 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions per pound than chicken or pork, and roughly 100 times more than beans. Some estimates put the water cost of a pound of conventionally raised beef at over 1,800 gallons. A pound of wheat takes about 220 gallons.
Here’s a sobering pair of statistics: Nearly 60% of the world’s agricultural land is used for beef production, and all that land yields less than 2% of humanity’s calories.
Grass-fed beef needs so much land, there’s no way it can scale to meet current market demand. According to a 2012 study in the journal Animals, if all the U.S. beef produced in 2010 had been grass-fed, the industry would have needed an extra 200,000 square miles. That’s an area larger than New York, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio combined.
Of course, a full switch to grass-fed would free up the cropland now growing corn and soy for feedlots. But not nearly enough to feed all those extra steers for all those extra months on pasture. A 2018 analysis found that a full switch would require about 30% more cattle, and that current U.S. pastures could support only about 27% of today’s beef supply.
The Global Picture
For the clearest picture of grass-fed beef at scale, look at Brazil. It’s the world’s largest beef exporter, and it accounts for nearly half of global forest loss tied to cattle pasture. According to analyses of map and satellite data, between 60 and 81% of the land cleared in the Brazilian Amazon between 1985 and 2022 became pasture. That’s for a herd that reached almost 240 million head in 2023 (which, fun fact, is the combined human populations of Turkey, Germany, and Thailand).
As global demand for beef has grown, so too has pressure on one of Earth’s most biodiverse ecosystems. Much of the soy grown in Brazil is exported to China, where a lot of it is crushed into soy meal for livestock. So the Amazon rainforest is now being annihilated in order to grow cattle on two continents.
Amazonian cattle are free-range, grass-fed, and possibly organic (terms that, as we’ll see at the end, mean less than most shoppers assume), but they are still a driving force behind global warming and rainforest destruction. And because U.S. supply can’t keep up with demand, the vast majority of what is sold in the U.S. as “grass-fed beef” is sourced from Brazil, Uruguay, New Zealand, and Australia. Thanks to a labeling loophole, it’s typically sold as a “product of the USA.”
There is some good news. Amazon deforestation has fallen since 2022, and the year to July 2025 was the lowest in 11 years. But the pasture left behind by previously cleared forest remains. And it won’t be reforested so long as cattle dominate the landscape.
But Not All Grassland Should be Forest
Of course, not every grassland is a forest waiting to happen. Many of the world’s native grasslands and savannas are ancient ecosystems with their own biodiversity, and planting trees on them can do more harm than good. On land that’s too dry, too steep, or too thin-soiled to crop, ruminants turn cellulose people can’t digest into food people can. Strictly from a human-calorie perspective, careful grazing may make some sense in such ecosystems.
The question is how much food that adds up to. A 2024 analysis in Nature Sustainability tried to answer it, counting only land with a history of grazing and capping herds at levels that don’t degrade it. The answer came out at roughly a quarter to 40% of the meat currently produced on the world’s grasslands, and about 10% of the milk.
That isn’t nothing, but it also isn’t a defense of the beef aisle as it stands. It describes a world eating vastly less beef than this one, raised mostly where grazing can actually fit.
“Better” Isn’t the Same as “Good”
So grass-fed beef that’s well-managed can be better than feedlot beef in some ways and still not be a great thing for the planet. Compared with a feedlot, grass-fed cattle avoid grain and soy feed, and on intensively managed pasture they may build some soil carbon, at least for a while. But even with generous credit for that carbon, grass-fed beef’s climate footprint (or hoofprint, as the case may be) is still enormous. And compared with rewilding, or letting land grow back into forest, grazing falls well short of what’s possible.
Grass-fed beef also uses far more land per pound, and the cattle still produce methane. Its limited environmental benefits are more than a rounding error only in a world that eats much less beef. With today’s appetite, you get what’s happening in the Amazon.
Is Grass-Fed Beef Better for Cattle?
Steers that graze for their whole lives are healthier, and almost certainly happier, than conventional cattle that are finished in feedlots. Feedlots such as California’s Harris Ranch routinely cram more than 100,000 cattle onto roughly 800 acres — about 1.25 square miles. But the steers aren’t potty trained, and they don’t pay for sewer hookups, either. So they live their entire lives in a mess of their own excrement.
Feeding cattle grain in feedlots can cause health problems, too, including liver abscesses, which is one reason that grain-fed cattle are typically given antibiotics right in their feed.
A corn diet can also cause feedlot bloat, in which gas that would normally be belched out gets trapped in the rumen. Michael Pollan describes the result in The Omnivore’s Dilemma: The rumen “inflates like a balloon, pressing against the animal’s lungs. Unless action is promptly taken to relieve the pressure (usually by forcing a hose down the animal’s esophagus), the cow suffocates.”
Feedlot beef as we know it today would be impossible if it weren’t for the routine and continual feeding of antibiotics to these animals. This leads directly and inexorably to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. These new “superbugs” are increasingly rendering our antibiotics ineffective for treating disease in humans.
In comparison, cattle experience greater well-being and better health when they’re able to eat the diet for which their digestive systems were designed, and when they have access to more outdoor space.
Still, the life of all livestock, whether grass-fed or grain-fed, does come to an extremely premature end. And there’s nothing cheery about their deaths. A better life is worth a lot. And it doesn’t change the final chapter.
The Best Beef?
Conventional, feedlot-finished beef is a health, environmental, and ethical disaster. Grass-fed beef is better in some ways that matter:
- For the cattle, it means a life spent outdoors, on the diet their bodies evolved for.
- For the land, well-managed grazing can rebuild degraded soil, store some carbon for a time, and avoid the fertilizer, pesticides, and forest-clearing that go into feedlot feed.
- For you, the nutritional differences are small, but the risk of bacterial contamination is lower.
- For the climate, it doesn’t appear to be better. Per pound, it produces more emissions than feedlot beef and needs two to three times the land. Unfortunately, even in well-managed systems, the soil carbon it builds doesn’t adequately close that gap.
All factors considered, if you’re going to eat beef, there are good reasons to choose 100% grass-fed over feedlot products. Three things are worth knowing at the counter.
“Grass-fed” and “100% grass-fed” are different claims. The USDA withdrew its formal grass-fed standard in 2016, and current federal guidance leans on producers’ own records, with uneven enforcement. So a package can say “grass-fed” while the animal behind it finished on grain. Look for 100% grass-fed, ideally with third-party certification. The American Grassfed Association’s seal also requires pasture without confinement, and no antibiotics or added hormones.
Organic is a separate claim. USDA organic certification means organic feed and no hormones or antibiotics. But it doesn’t mean the animal grazed on pasture for its whole life. Organic beef can come from cattle finished on organic grain in a feedlot.
Know where it came from. As we saw earlier, most beef sold in the U.S. as grass-fed is imported from Brazil, Uruguay, New Zealand, and Australia, and a labeling loophole lets much of it be sold as a product of the USA. Grass-fed from a cleared Amazon pasture isn’t the thing this article is describing.
Ultimately, grass-fed beef is still red meat, with the same links to cancer, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes. It still produces methane. And it needs far more land per pound than feedlot beef, which is why it can only ever be a sustainable part of a world that eats a lot less beef.
There are a growing range of plant-based options to choose from. (For our guide to getting started on a whole food, plant-powered diet, click here.) There are plant-based meats, some so realistic they can satisfy, if not outright fool, meat eaters, though most are highly processed.
And don’t forget about beans. If the world started swapping beans for beef even some of the time, we could take a huge bite out of climate change. We could ease the pressure on what’s left of the Amazon. We could spare the lives of tens of millions of steers, and free up land to restore forests and grasslands.
And while we’re at it, we could prevent a few heart attacks, too.
Tell us in the comments:
- Do you eat grass-fed beef? Why or why not?
- Do you think that grass-fed beef can be part of the climate change solution?
- What are some of your favorite beef-free food alternatives?
Feature image: iStock.com/adamkaz
Read Next:
We’d love to hear your thoughts!
This is a space for dialogue about food and health. Respectful disagreement is welcome. Marketing links and mean posts are not. You can read our Community Guidelines here for more information.
Our family grew a cow on an acre of land in Northern California; when it came time to be served on the table, both my brother and I cried and couldn’t bring ourselves to eat it as we loved the animal: that was the last time we saw that beef and, although I try to stay away from it, I must admit while traveling occasionally I’ve ordered an enchilada.
Hi Max, We’re sorry this one didn’t land well for you. We try to hold every article, including this one, to the same evidence-based standard, and we know that sometimes means presenting information that complicates a popular narrative, in either direction. We appreciate you saying so directly rather than just moving on, and we’ll take the feedback into account for future coverage of this topic. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hi Donna! Thank you for sharing your perspective. We didn’t set out to demonize grass-fed beef. In fact the article states plainly that grass-fed is arguably better than feedlot beef on health, environmental, and ethical grounds. Our aim was to look honestly at the marketing claims versus the research, which sometimes means pointing out that “better than conventional” doesn’t automatically mean “health food.” We’re glad to hear pushback when something reads as one-sided, and we’ll keep that in mind. -–Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hi CJ–thank you so much for your candid feedback! We’re sorry to hear you felt this way! We don’t take losing your respect lightly. Regenerative grazing and the Savory Institute’s work on soil health are actually addressed in the article, in the “Carbon Sequestration and Rotational Grazing” section. We tried to represent that the benefits are real but limited, not that they don’t matter at all. We’re always open to a closer look if you think we’ve misrepresented something specific. -–Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hi Gordon, thank you so much for weighing in here! We hear you on wanting to trust the numbers here. That statistic comes from a 2011 Environmental Working Group analysis, which we’ve linked directly in the article if you’d like to see their methodology. We always aim to source claims like this rather than just asserting them, so we welcome you digging into it yourself. -–Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Thanks for engaging so thoroughly with the article, Chris. A few of the points you raise, like the grass-fed versus grass-finished distinction and GMO feed in conventional cattle operations, are worth more attention, and we’ll pass that feedback to our content team. We’d gently push back on the idea that saturated fat and cholesterol have been fully cleared as heart disease factors. The research is more nuanced than a single study or doctor’s opinion on either side, and we try to reflect the weight of the evidence rather than any one voice. We appreciate you taking the time to write this out. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hello Re, Thank you for such a thoughtful comment, and for sharing your own farming background. You raise fair questions. Plant-based agriculture isn’t free of environmental tradeoffs, and water use, land use, and processing all deserve honest scrutiny too. This article focused mainly on comparing grass-fed to conventional beef rather than doing a full plant-vs-animal environmental accounting, which is a fair limitation to point out. We’ll keep your questions in mind for future articles that look more directly at that comparison. -–Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hello again Kathy–your information was forwarded to Ocean and the blog team, and they will be making appropriate adjustments to the article. Thanks again for giving us this valuable information! –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Hello RCAlberta–Thanks so much for your comment. You’re right that “grass-fed” and “grass-finished” aren’t the same thing, and that distinction matters a lot. The article actually covers this under the “What Grass-Fed and Organic Beef Labels Actually Mean” section, including why 100% grass-finished is the more meaningful label to look for. Thanks for making sure that point doesn’t get lost in the comments. -–Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Well stated Tom… the ideology behind so-called excessive methane production by cattle in one of the silliest and ridiculous claims ever…especially claiming it is a major contributor to global warming… which they now call climate change.
The WHO did their best countering all the lies and misinformation about a lab leak origin. Tedros did make a big mistake in not fully embracing the results of the WHO Mission, which correctly found Sars-CoV-2 most likely originated from an animal spillover from the Huanan market. WHO could have announced human-to-human transmission sooner, but this was a very new virus.
Thank you for this feedback, BWJ! We appreciate your opinion and honesty. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Thank you for sharing your story and your feedback with us, Gary. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Tempeh is definitely underrated–such a great form of protein. And beet burgers are always so good. Thanks for sharing, KRP! –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
When you mention the WHO, it gives me pause. After the way they handled the Covid disaster, I will never believe a word they say as fact.
I’m so glad this article was inspirational to you, Brendan! –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Thank you so much for this clarification, Kathy! I will share this information with the blog team. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
Do you really think that if cows were banished that their grazing lands would become forest or open land again? That land would quickly be paved over. I thank the cows for saving our land. But I hate big ag! The CAFOs (concentrated feeding operations) are ruining the land, but they prove my point. As the cows become more concentrated, the land they used to take up is rapidly turned into urban sprawl.
Thank you Nancy…very well said. One needs to apply logic to this argument and animals that remain closer to Nature their whole life will be better to consume. The same goes for plants and fruits from trees.
Unfortunately Julia, as much as I love Food Revolution, I found the article full of inaccuracies and bias. I did not think it a good promotion for a vegetarian or vegan diet. I was very disappointed in the evidenced predisposition. Not what I would have expected.
I’m a little mystified by your comparison of a “cow” raised for meat and a what has to be a dairy cow (due to your wording) in terms of length of life.
Perhaps it is a matter of the definition of “cow.?” As a person from an agricultural background I think it would serve your readers to use the proper terms.
Yes, at times we all call all bovines cows. But it could be perceived as purposely biased or misleading in this context. Don’t compromise your credibility!
Cows, in this context are only the adult females.
A herd of cows are cattle, as is a herd of both genders, young and old as well as neutered males. Or a herd of only males, both fertile and neutered.
This article says few cows live over three years. That’s an obviously incorrect statement. I think you mean “few STEERS live more than three years” and that would be a true statement.
Bulls are the fertile, mature males. Very few male calves get to live beyond their second year. They are used primarily to produce offspring. Only one bull is necessary to produce the next year’s crop of calves.
Cows are the most valuable. More cows means more calves and those calves are what are sold for the meat market.
So a cow on a cattle ranch can live a long life. As long as she produces a calf every season and remains healthy, herself, she is an asset.
The male calves, however are neutered young and raised for slaughter. These are called “steers.”
If the ranch has too many cows, some heifers may be sold too. They might be sold or traded to other cattle operations to introduce a fresh bloodline and prevent inbreeding. Same with some of the bulls.
At a dairy, the cows have an economic value of about 6 years. Their production begins to drop after that. Ten years is about the longest life for Holsteins (the most common breed of dairy cow in the USA.) When the farmer determines that she is no longer producing more milk than her feed and upkeep costs, she also is sold for slaughter. Throughout her life, the dairy cow’s offspring are also sold for slaughter, with a few females kept to replace the oldest cows.
Cow – mature female bovine (or elk).
Bull – mature, male bovine (or elk)
Heifer – immature or un-bred female bovine
Bullock or “bull calf”- young male bovine (less than 2 yrs old)
Steer – castrated male bovine
Calf – a young bovine (Calves, plural – not gender specific)
Cattle – plural that can be applied to all of the above, especially when the ages and/or genders are mixed or unknown.
“Cows” depends on the context.
Let’s compare apples to apples. Anything else looks dishonest.
I eat grass fed because it is high in Omega-3’s and low in Omega-6’s That means it is very low in deuterium contend as grasses reject deuterium via chloroplasts. Low deuteium meats don’t have tough grissles and they ae super tender.
I see that you don’t know issues for the finer meats…
Great article, good for thought, from a small farmer in the west of lreland looking to diversify away from raising cattle for beef
Hi! I grew up on a smallholding producing beef cattle who travelled 2 miles to the abattoir and then another 5 to the butcher and with the beef sold as quarters to local individuals. The bullocks were raised on their mums and on our ancient meadow, on the side of a hill. They were fit, happy and all of us sad to see them go when the time came. In short farming the old way and very difficult to make a profit but ultimately good quality products from happy healthy cattle. I am always in interested in these discussions as welfare of animals and those consuming them, and taste, are very important to me, but so it our earth.
I have genuine questions about several aspects of plant based farming (especially intensive systems) – water use for irrigation of crops, land use for crops, increase run off/flooding, soil integrity, soil quality (legumes do good for nitrogen for example but are thirsty and hungry crops), carbon capture on regularly ploughed land, use of pesticides and herbicides, use of genetic engineering, gases released from wasted produce, CO2/methane for the transport of them, let’s for arguments sake say a mango to the UK…, CO2 and land use of the factories used to process them (oat milk, processed meat like products) the level of processing required for the processed products (because let’s face it, most people who do not eat animal products do not eat whole seeds, pulses, veg and fruit) as most processing changes nutrition but adds not so good elements. Nor do most people eat locally or seasonally.
I do think all of these need to be fairly and honestly considered and the working shown. Your article is very American intensive agriculture heavy, as opposed to ranch style raising/UK models, and I do think it is not comparable, without all the elements above included to plant based diets. If I’m honest it doesn’t read from a neutral start point.
Like so many things farming has evolved from my childhood experiences to a monster feeding the demand for lots of food at low prices. If people were better informed and placed higher value on grass fed, high welfare products then it would change the nature of farming. We all need to value our food more!
Most farms in the UK are leaning more towards grass fed, many have higher welfare practices like open space, raised by mum, less processed food etc (I’m more sure we have ‘feed lots’ either, maybe our equivalent is barn finishing which is often weather based). On the health aspect…I can see how something higher in saturated fat is not as good for you. But in a more natural world it would have been a weekly treat not an every day staple. Corn fed chicken is much less good for you than free ranging omnivorous raised chicken – I remember reading there is a difference in how our gut responds. So it would be interesting to see if the cancer causing element in beef is as common in grass fed as corn fed…?
Anything with an unnatural base (pesticides, herbicides, hormone use, too many antibiotics, genetic engineering, unnatural diets for animals, low welfare practices, air travel, long distance travel for animals etc) have greater impact than beef on both our health and the environment I’m afraid than red meat. I’d be happy to hear neutral evidence based comparisons for each continent! Thanks for what you are doing generally for nutrition/food 😊
I cannot afford to buy organic/grass fed meat most times and i prefer it over conventions. Sam’s club has organic in 1 lb packages × 3 to buy and i also go to whole foods when there is a sale.
The meat to me tastes better than non organic.
I dont know if grass fed can be a part of the climate change solution.
Can’t say I have a favorite beef-free food, as I eat what I am able to afford. If I have no meat, I eat beans and rice plus spices or soup or salad with veggie I have.
Sometimes I make chicken breasts and have those or fish or pork. Not so often on pork though.
Thanks
I don’t eat beef as the ending for these animals is always terror and violence.
The whole thing to me is so cruel. Making money fattening up animals. Thank’s ocean and keep up the wonderful work you do, love mim.t
I live in rural Ireland and use a local butcher, we have “farm to fork” traceability, I know the farmer who raised the beef I eat (usually). I see the cows happily eating grass (multiple types of grass and herbs) on my way to work or town and would not eat beef from any other country other than Ireland as I know we have happy cows
I love tempeh with eggs for breakfast. And homemade beet and lentil burgers are a hit with all my dinner guests.
I do eat butter ( occasionally) and yogurt. I’ve been told that butter and yogurt from Grassfed cows is the healthiest choice. Sheep yogurt is delicious but hard to find and expensive.
Thank you, Ocean!
If everyone ate beans we would produce a lot more methane. I thought carbon dioxide fed plant life, and in return, plants produce oxygen, feeding us. Millions of wild animals create methane and carbon dioxide.
Heart disease and cancer take years to develop. I don’t wish that upon anyone but just keep in mind that humans don’t feel the result of eating animals and their secretions, until years of accumulation.
God didn’t make cows. Human beings breed them cruelly.
Just look at their behavior. Mother cows are loving to their babies.
Slaughtering is not ethical.
But they sure don’t die stress-free. Much suffering
Eating eggs and dairy milk involves much cruelty but it’s hidden from most people. The male chickens and male cows are killed, tortured, in these industries. Baby cows are separated from their mothers. Mother cows cry out for their babies. Every time animals are used for human gain, there is cruelty and abuse involved.
No, I don’t eat cows, no matter what they ate. They are sentient beings who cannot speak for themselves that they do not want to be slaughtered.
Sorry but being a former committed vegetarian I had my bias radar on and this article set out to demonize the healthiest form of beef. Why do that? The article is riddled with suppositions not backed by fact. Ie. “Grass-fed beef advocates claim that it’s better for the environment than traditional beef. But that, in and of itself, is not saying much. After all, conventional beef production is nothing short of an environmental disaster.”
And you focused on diminishing its value. Where is the commentary on things like B 12 and creatine supplied by beef easily? The protein many people need. Please keep to positive articles about what you know best in the vegetarian world. Demonizing something because you don’t believe in it isn’t fair.
So what about those millions upon millions of buffalo that roamed and grazed the great plains for 100’s of years if not thousands of years….then we’re exterminated almost,then the land was plowed up for 30 years to plant wheat that created the dust bowl.
While we’re at it let’s get rid of all the carnivorous animals like lions and tigers and wolves and Hawks and all the other carnivorous animals too numerous to mention that don’t kill their prey in a humane fashion.
Ever since Mad Cow disease became an issue, I have avoided eating beef unless it is grass-fed.
Totally with you Karen. Don’t trust anything that comes from the WHO. When we stopped ranchers from doing what they do best, that’s when beef became unhealthy. Let’s let the government tell us what we should eat. Great idea… NOT! My grandparents lived healthy lives well into their nineties. No cancer or other serious illness.
How is it that when a vegetarian or vegan becomes sick with anything, anything at all, it’s because they don’t eat meat and or dairy. Yet meat eaters get the same conditions – yes, even when consuming that naturally raised, non-GMO, etc. flesh. How can this be. It does not make sense.
Maybe illness is not a simple matter of diet. “Eat this. Don’t eat that.” LOL. How simple minded.
The article briefly mentions the reduction of cancer. That issue deserves MUCH more of the focus and information. The reduction of cancer caused by supplements is sufficient reason BY ITSELF to omit all red meat sale and consumption. Before 2000, I was a “repeat” cancer patient with surgery that removed 3 separate types of cancer from my body. In about 2000, my Dr. said you WILL NOT any more red meat, (from any mammals), because of the cancer growth resulting from growth stimulants in their diet. Since then, I have been cancer-free instead of cancer-friendly as I was before. GLW
No one is claiming that grass fed and grass finished beef is the same as feedlot beef. Yes, the former type of beef is better for you.
However, everyone here who wants or needs beef never, and I mean never, talks about the actual killing. I have seen it. In real life, not a video.
Animal’s eyes glaze over, knees buckling, foaming at the mouth, terrible mooing, finally falling over. Then hoisted up and sliced open and guts falling out, etc. etc.
All my grandparents had health issues including arthritis. They lived on small farms and consumed naturally raised animals and dairy products. Also some wild meat. Indeed, all the old people I knew in my youth (50 years ago) seemed to be stiff and arthritic.
It is true that “one serving” of protein powder is about 30 grams of protein. It is true that such amounts would likely have a negative effect on our kidneys and liver. However, eating a lot of meat has the same effect.
Cows aren’t even native to North Amerika. Importing them here and making a huge industry out of killing & eating them was a major mistake. I do not see how anyone will keep cows for permaculture unless they are going to somehow make money off of them
And the “missing factor” in your comment is the ugliness of animal killing. It is a moral crime, but people want their beef really bad, so they should have it if they feel better for consuming it. It will all be fixed up and regularized on judgment day. And itz coming.
Do you watch the actual killing and processing? If you can do so without batting an eyelash, you need and are entitled to eat that “meat”.
I do agree with you that climate change is a distraction and part of a much larger agenda. It is distressing to see well meaning people buy into the whole climate thing.
Yes, man-made climate change is a pile of you-know-what. I sure agree with you there. However, some of us avoid all meat because we just do not want to eat it. We are not forcing ourselves to be vegetarian or vegan. If vegans & vegetarians stop meat for so-called environmental, political or health reasons, they can’t stick with it. They smell meat cooking and want to have some.
I have had no such problems or cravings and I am talking more than 4 decades here. My reasons are personal and emotional – yes, emotion, that terrible thing so many are afraid of and ridicule. I was sickened to see animal slaughter, and years later, when I read more and more about the inherent cruelty in meat, my desires just fell away.
Therefore, I think that Ocean and his Food Revolution Network are making a big mistake listing all these technical reasons to avoid meat. You either want it or you don’t. If you crave it, eat it and be done with it. But quit looking the other way when you see an animal killed. It is ugly.
Quoting the WHO ha ha ha
Human beings have been eating meat or various kinds for eons, and as long as they are not eating other humans, it can certainly be done ethically. And, how do you know the mind of a cow or chicken??
Hi Nancy, I also eat red meat, only 100% grass-fed, because of needing iron. I was a vegetarian for a while, but became anemic. I also like to regularly donate blood, so some red meat is helpful there. I eat a lot of spinach and citrus and also take vegetarian iron capsules, but some red meat is still needed.
You got it! “Safe and effective” neurologically disabled my husband for the rest of his life (medically documented and reported btw). I’ll take my organic class 2A carcinogen along with my organic keto diet and happily live out the rest of my days.
Grass fed beef is not the same as grass fed/grass finished beef. Unless beef is also finished on grass, grass fed animals are sent to feedlots to be finished. This undoes any benefits a life time of grazing has provided. Beef must also be FINISHED on grass.
Some interesting comments most of which are slightly true.
The best life for a cow, sheep, deer goat is a mixture of pure grass (but mixed species at least 12 varieties ) and hedgerow, if a cow’s diet includes about 20-30% hedgerow watch the condition, health and happiness of the animals.
But the biggest missing factor here, and across all food is its “life Force”
Until we can read and measure life force in food we will continue to consume bulk not life giving energies. We only eat twice a day, never after 2:00pm, today we eat a third of what we did 5 years ago and the change in health is magical, also always fast on a Monday.
We have selected customers that buy from the farm, and have been doing so for over 6 years, they all comment that we have ruined meat for them as they can never eat out and get any pleasure,
We have had our meat eaten on 3 occasions by devout vigans x 2 and vegetarians x 1 who smelt the meat cooking, were drawn by the smell and flavour and actually took a taste, then all ate an 8oz dexter burger. All three replied with the same comment “ this food has life force” 3 ladies across the whole of our country exact same description all eating meat with enthusiasm.
A large agricultural country with good ethics and over 90% organic has found that when you transport food further than 400km the food begins to become “sick” more work has been done but it appears true.
What you put into food as you grow it, you will then harvest it on mass.
We have proved this with cows sheep chickens, vegetables, soft fruit, apples, figs, grapes, and especially bees, connect with bees and watch your life and land change.
We are making a start but my view is educate the customers and the farmers and buy local direct that way the real food produces and the customers benefit, not bigger players who actually produce nothing.
When you really work with nature she just continues to push boundaries that you never thought could be achieved then she performs better again. An example, we are now on our 5th generation of cherry tomato plants, from our own seed.
The publicised number of cherry tomatoes you get from a commercial packet of seeds is 90-120.
This year we average over 700!!!!!!
Learn to work with our mother and it will amaze everyone what is actually possible.
Many thanks for your great work.
MA
The only red meat I eat is bison that is raised on the South Dakota prairie and never put in a feedlot!
I believe protein powder of any kind is not healthful. Protein powder is not the same as actual protein. Actual Protein is taken in smaller doses. It is digested differently. Protein powder can damage kidneys and the liver. Protein powder is a trend that quite a few doctors have spoken out against. Humans do not need the amount of protein we’re being told we need. A combination of plant based protein and animal based protein is far healthier that protein powder.
Is Grass-Fed Beef Better for the Environment? Quote: A 2011 Environmental Working Group analysis found that beef produces about 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions per pound than chicken or pork, and roughly 100 times more than beans. Unquote! (Lost my attention after that statement!)
You lost me at; Red meat of all kinds, including GF Beef, is labeled a class 2A carcinogen by the WHO
The WHO also told us that the Covid Jabs were safe and effective. You would be wise not to use them as a source.
I get my GF Beef from a small local farmer who raises only a few cows.
When I do eat meat, it is small amounts and I am also eating lots of vegetables, fruits, nuts and seed.
I believe climate change and global warming are a detraction and for control.
calf weined to field rest of life is my prefered some of your stats not accurate
Animals of all kinds have a will to live peaceful , happy lives . By respecting their wishes, we contribute to a planet that can thrive on love and respect. Treating any life form as a commodity for gain ,, for whatever reason, continues the belief that some have more rights than others . Their are substitutes for all animal products . I do not condemn others for their choices . But I do pray for a more loving and compassionate world where we all free to live in peace. Much love to All
Thanks for a thoughtful and well-referenced article – I feel much better educated about beef production and its costs in the US. It’s so easy now to swap out beef for beans: red kidney beans, lentils, chickpeas, butter beans or vegetables – and all can be made so wonderfully tasty! Try a red curry dish with cauliflower! Delicious.
It’s out there. Usually in documentaries that captured scientists exposing this scam in public and government forums, but are censured by the media. Sustainabitlity Agendas 21 and 30 tell of these merchant’s deviate plans. Also, you can pull up the “Toronto Protocal” from 1967 and related recordings , such as the Dr. Richard Day lecture (1969?), of what these globalists are up to.
Pretty much everything we have been taught and programmed to believe all our lives by these money groping parasitic world rulers is a lie for their gain and our hurt. They are the ones that are destroying this earth’s forests, poluting our air, water, food, soils, and our bodies with their chemicals, EMFs, SMART technologies, bioweapons, heavy metal dispersion exposure ….
EPA, FDA, USDA, CDC, IRS, FBI, CIA, AMA, ADA… all a bunch of crap aimed at supporting merchants, not people’s wellness.
Best to follow Scripture for what God says is good or evil, not men. The men and their invented agencies described above all fall under evil.
God made all things. All thins are His. Man only causes chaos and destruction. The real solution to all our problems is stop merchants from govening us with their no liability corporations and all other theft schemes via their legal system, banks, wars, governments, religions, schools, media, medicine/pharma, science, entertainment, courts, … None of these things are of God. None of it, especially their money, which is their top tool to enslave us, steal from us, and destroy God’s earth, seas, and heaven. It’s not the cows fault. It’s theirs, and all of us that believe in them.
Thank you for sharing so much Chris. It’s not an EZ thing to write a complete article and I appreciate the more rounded inclusive info in addition to the Ocean view. Great to have the many inclusions and reminders of facts as we know them. Great for us that you took the effort and time to remind me of some short comings as presented.
Thid did’t include the beef protein and comparisons that one can get in this grass fed and finished beef.
Sorry, I thought it was obvious that you wouldn’t want GMO products.
I completely respect your work and I remember your father on PBS in the 1980s. But since I am a teacher allow me to grade your essay. ” C-“. First of all since your father has a series on PBS you should be familiar with what really causes heart disease. Dr Perlmutter,Dr Hyman, Dr Gundry, etc…..have already debunked the myth with their shows and books of high cholesterol from eating too much saturated fat is causing heart disease. Please look at Japanese and Swedish studies on this. Inflammation from eating chemicals disguised as food that cannot digest properly is the main cause of heart disease. Not too long ago Japanese students in elementary school through high school went to school from 7 am to 7 pm. Japan had a very high suicide rate and so did the Scandinavian countries especially Denmark ( l laugh when I see studies that state that Danish people are among the happiest people in the world) Researchers in the Swedish studies found that the Swedish people and people all over the world including Minnesota become depressed during the winter and are more likely to have heart attacks. Light therapy has worked . In your article you don’t mention that it’s not enough for a code to be grass fed. Grass fed for a few months? The beef has to come from a cow that is grass fed AND GRASS FINISHED. You also don’t mention that our grandparents and great grandparents got their vitamin K/K2 from eating grass fed and grass finished cows ( beef). You omitted that conventionally raised cows in the USA are illegally injected with genetically modified hormones and fed genetically modified corn and soybeans. You don’t mention GMOs at all. Even if soybean are organic soy is a xenoestrogen mimicking estrogen in your body and can bring on estrogen dominance that fuels uterine fibroids, reproductive cancers, etc. May I suggest you read the book MAD COWBOY? The author was sued along with Oprah Winfrey by cattle ranchers in Texas for showing diseased animals being slaughtered and refed to other cows. He watched his farmer father doing this to their animals in the 1940s. Please also read Upton Sinclair’s book The Jungle and Jim Hightowers expose on President Trump greenlighting anything the cattle ranchers, slaughter houses and meat packing plants do in exchange for a donation ( bribe). Almost 10 years ago the meat industry promised to phase out antibiotics in animals feed. So far they haven’t complied . The don’t have to. I’ll pay $100 for a filet mignon that came from a cow that was grass fed and grass finished. But I will eat beef only once or twice a year. I used to live in Greece in my 20s and 30s, 3-5 times a year in 13 years. I always returned back to the states 20-25 pounds lighter despite eating so much. I now know why. In Europe I was eating REAL FOOD, but not in the USA. There is a reason that the McDonald’s in Europe is made with different ingredients than the McDonald’s in the USA. They depend on our ignorance. I was in Greece during the 1989 mad cow disease scandal where teenagers were dying of mad cow disease after eating a burger. My cousin in Greece was a butcher and told me not to worry because the Greeks never buy their beef from the English. The English government took the side of their cattle ranchers and beef industries. They declared that these were isolated incidences. Until the English people stopped buying beef. As a result almost 2 million cows were put down. Also Google the Danish farmer ( Pedersen) who was a 3-4 generation cattle farmer and bought his cattle feed from Brazil. By the third generation his cows were infertile. He had never seen this before. In 2012 I was reading a Swedish newspaper at the library and saw a warning to Swedish people. It warned them not to buy their Christmas ham from the Danes that year because the Danes were buying genetically modified feed from Brazil. I told this to my Danish father and he was stunned. You may want to know that the ONLY reason my father left Denmark was to go to the Sunshine in California. Every Christmas he’d put on his bikini underwear and a Santa Claus hat and pose in front of the giant Christmas tree at Knott’s Berry Farm then send it to his mother and sisters who were freezing in Denmark. It was embarrassing to watch especially when he was nearing his 80s.
Nutritionally, you MIGHT have a point but you somehow manage to overlook the fact that feedlot cattle are fed GMO products. I prefer to have a small increase in vitamins but no GMOs .
I include beef in my diet. I have problems with oxalates and lectins. After reducing plants my quality of life improved. I still love my plants, I just have to have small quantities on occasion.
judy
“Red meat is NOT a carcinogen. Not if it is not OVERCOOKED. Eating red meat is not harmful in the least, if sourced correctly and cooked correctly. Saturated fat is not at all bad for you”. Meat and Dairy Industry is the source of these monumental lies. They cherry pick and fund research that will fit this narritive leaving out hundreds of independent studies that prove otherwise. I can’t believe people don’t see the corruption. Just looking at these statistics says it all “Chronic diseases affect approximately 6 in 10 adults (76.4% or 194 million people) in the U.S., with over half living with multiple conditions. They drive 90% of the nation’s $4.5+ trillion annual healthcare expenditures and account for 8 of the 10 leading causes of death.” These aren’t Plant-based eaters that are making up these statistics.
I encourage you to truly look into the dairy industry there is nothing harmless about it. How would you like to be forcibly impregnated have your baby taken away and then milk you until you’re no good anymore and offer no profit then go off to a slaughterhouse and have your throat slit
Enslaving sentient beings, raping them taking their babies away then horrifically slaughtering is not good for anyone especially the animals. No wonder people get sick and obese it’s the payback from God for the horrific way that most people treat the animals. God’s sentient beings are supposed to be our friends not our food. The whole animal agriculture system is a demonic entity and it has no place on the Earth. What if you were the animal would you want to be slaughtered? Most humans are selfish and care more about their gluttony and their 5 minutes of mouth pleasure then they do about the life of a being that didn’t want to be enslaved for them
Thank you Ocean for another wonderful informative explanation. I enjoy eating the majority of whole food plant based eating and based on my body sometimes I did eat red meat as I had some surgeries. All the best plant based eating could not give me that jump start my body seemed to need yet it was for a brief time. I am back to no animals again thankfully. The battle of life with strength unchained! Bless all you do Ocean! I read your father’s book in the early 90’s as it was a required book in one of my nutrition certifications.
C’est pas la vie – c’est une vie de mort. Bioavailable Iron supplements taken with Vit C would have done the same with no animal life sacrifice.
Hi again, Forgot to tell you how small the piece of red meat that I eat for breakfast is. It’s is about two inches round & 1/4 inch thick. As you can tell, very small. That’s all it takes to do the job of raising my hemoglobin.
Great job Ocean and Company!! Thank you for your educational presentation and time investment into such matters of Heallth and Heart.
For many years I didn’t eat beef or any red meat for all the reasons you have listed. I ate free range poultry & wild caught fish, mainly salmon Then my blood tests were showing low hemoglobin & my doctor was concerned. So, I knew exactly what to do. I came home & started to eat red meat again, only grass fed or organic Beef and found some Elk, Venison, & Bison, all from small local farms. I really didn’t want to eat red meat again, but even my TCM doctor said that the only way to get my hemoglobin up was to eat it. She was really neat, she told me that all I had to do was eat a very small piece of fillet mignon…because of little or no fat every morning for breakfast. So, I bought the “wild” meats, less expensive & they are like little fillets, every morning. Up went my hemoglobin!! When I went for blood tests again, my doctor was amazed. He said that whatever I was doing…keep it up!! So, I know all about the disadvantages of red meat..but then I found out, I must eat it for my hemoglobin. I have eaten mostly vegetarian for many years then started adding the poultry & fish as previously mentioned, but it wasn’t enough for my body. I still have many vegetarian suppers. Not all of us can go completely vegetarian or vegan, some of us must eat red meats for our health. I stopped eating eggs years ago, still won’t eat them. C’est la vie. Thanks for such a detailed article on beef.
Thank you Cyril. My thoughts exactly on the examples provided as ‘eviidence’ and sticking to the real scientific evidence.
There’s no ‘ethical’ or right way to raise and kill someone who doesn’t want to die.
Dead cows don’t improve soil or make grass grow. Soils are improved by manure that comes from living Beings not dead ones, and compost that comes from decomposing vegetation.
I tried living on a vegetarian diet for four years. My health suffered. My doctor recommended that I try eating meat at east once a week. It improved my health greatly. Shortly after that I discovered the Blood Type Diet. For those with blood type O, the diet of our hunter gatherer ancestors is considered most suitable. Once I started on a Paleo diet, my body thrived. I need a high animal protein diet to feel healthy. I have red meat 2 – 3 times a week and chicken and fish the other days. I cannot endorse a fully plant based diet for everyone. As far as grass fed beef is concerned, I believe that it is healthier than feedlot beef and can be raised sustainably by conscientious and educated ranchers.
Would you please direct me to where it has been shown that Climate Change is a scam? I am genuinely interested. Thanks
Here’s something to consider…..eating or not eating animals or parts of them isn’t about what people feel or think or want to believe, it’s about what the animals feel. Imagine yourself in their positions and ask ‘how would I like to be killed and eaten because someone who feels that it’s their right to kill and eat me?”
I live in New Zealand where grass fed beef is the norm. One of our biggest exports to the USA is grass feed beef.
Fantastic factual article . Well done!
I eat grass fed beef and enjoy it. I do eat all meat in moderation. Usually 2-3 times a week. This is my decision for health reasons. I am not going to put pressure on myself to conform to any ideas of others. I read and do my own research and come to my own conclusion.
I am saddened to read this misleading article obviously written by vegetarians. My family are regenerative farmers and ranchers. Soil health is the forefront of our family’s mission. We use animal impact to emulate nature. Look up the Allen Savory Institute to educate yourself on the importance of animal impact to bring back land that has been desertified. I have lost respect for Food Revolution. Just because you choose to be vegetarian does not mean it’s the only choice. I had a vegetarian friend that died recently at 47 years old of malnutrition which lead to her body consuming itself. At the end of the day, she needed animal protein. So how about you educate on what you know and leave the scare tactics about grass-fed beef out of your message.
Same as Aus, I buy my beef from a small family farmer, who raise his cattle and lamb ethically and organically.
TBH< I gave up eating beef ( I miss it too, well I miss the old beef ) I also gave up eating chicken and pork especially in the UK. maybe its my aged taste buds bt, none of it tasted like it used to, and the chicken … is it even chicken these days! I now live in the Philippines and do eat " native chicken " free range to you and me and they are free range. Im moving to build a small farm ( mainly rice, fruits and veg) but I will have free range open land chickens ( native chickens ) for whenever we want to have any. yes, they are way skinnier but sooo much tastier, and to a degree you know what you are eating! And this " Fake meat" they produce now !!!!god only knows what we have been eating from our supermarkets over recent years!!
My own spiritual and educational path has led me from omnivorism to vegetarianism to veganism. I may even end up a fruitarian at some point. (Speaking of fruit in the botanical sense, which means the seed-baring or spore-bearing part of a plant or fungus, including grains, nuts, seeds, mushrooms, and fruits, both sweet and savory.) it is a mutualistic way of eating, which aligns with my love for all beings and desire to do no harm. It’s not for everyone, not everyone is ready for that—but I am convinced it is the way of peace.
Depends. If it’s made from grass-fed and -finished cattle, preferably regeneratively or organically pastured, I say yes. But I avoid any that contains soy protein isolate and other unhealthy enhancements. Read ingredient labels carefully and learn what to look out for.
Please remove my name from your mailing list. Thank you.
Too many conflate the “red meat is bad” with all meat. I wouldn’t eat CAFO meat: I suspect during the months of confinement being fattened up some steers get sick and then the whole encampment gets a round of antibiotics. How many rounds, I wonder? We eat mostly plants: beans, nuts, seeds and I grow vegetables, but we also eat a variety of GF/GF or pastured-animal meats and their fat products. Balance matters. Most of the article sounds like Bill Gates and his friends from the NWO using climate change to move people away from health-giving red meats onto lab-cultured goo chasing the money. Then THEY will eat steaks, I betcha.
I don’t believe it’s as simple as, cows improve soil. They can also heavily damage ecosystems if not rotated properly. But they can play a part in helping permaculture farms to produce better. One doesn’t need to kill and eat them to let them play a part in making our farms more fertile.
Is protein powder from grass fed beef harmful to health?
I have been vegetarian all my life with minimal dairy but have recently been thinking of Veganism. It’s being motivated by something I heard by Jaak Panksep – one of the most distinguished neuro-scientists in the world – about the indisputable fact of animals have feelings – not just sentience. I am conflicted between going fully in – with the perspective of “if all animals feel things – I do not want to contribute to their suffering” which farming practice contributes to – so no animal products whatsoever including moving away from leather belts, shoes etc or woollen jumpers – either that OR sticking with the fundamental principle of – ‘I do not want to contribute to cruelty and suffering of animals’ – therefore I could still have eggs occasionally – or milk – if I know they are coming from say a 100% ethical and cruelty-free source like my friends hobby farm? My partner suggests animals suffering is much more about capitalistic greed and that my thinking ought to be guided by seeking to make sure what I consume is not a product of cruelty facilitated by capitalistic greed rather than cart-blanche deciding never to have any animal products ever again. Am interested in people’s thoughts on this.
Soil is the most important factor and guess what – cows improve soil and make grass grow!! How did our grandparents eat? Stick to our grandparents diet which did include beef and not processed industrialized foods.
I lived in the US for over 30 years and came back to my beautiful country New Zealand where most things are very different. Grass fed beef here is extremely healthy and the cattle do not forage in bad grasslands and live very stress free. I really wish people would stop blaming cattle farts for climate change… do your research and maybe stop so much air travel etc., for starters! A better supply of healthy foods would I am sure, help many Americans.
Thank you for pulling all of this together. Eating animals is an inefficient use of resources, a very unhealthy choice for both you and the planet, it’s more expensive than eating a whole-food,
plant-based diet, and it’s unethical if we don’t need it to survive.
Red meat is NOT a carcinogen. Not if it is not OVERCOOKED. Eating red meat is not harmful in the least, if sourced correctly and cooked correctly. Saturated fat is not at all bad for you. Neither is cholesterol. Ancel Keys is the source of these monumental lies with his fraudulent, so-called SEVEN COUNTRIES STUDY in which he cherry-picked 7 counties that fit his narrative, leaving out more than a dozen more, in which there was data for which would have disproven his pre-formed hypothesis. I can’t believe people in 2026 are still falling for this garbage!!!
I eat grass-fed and regeneratively farmed beef that I get from two trusted sources. I generally eat it about six or seven times a month and I don’t eat more than 4-5 ounces in a meal. I think many people who think eating gf beef is “too expensive” would save money (and be healthier) if they managed their portions better. One pound of grass fed beef is definitely more expensive than conventional, but tastes a million times better! I eat fish, chicken, and vegetarian meals more often than beef, so I think of it as a treat now and then.
Grass fed beef every day!
Healthy as a horse!
I have followed a mostly plant based diet for over 50 years. I occasionally have fish, eggs or rennetless cheese. My opinion on animal flesh and other animal products is they can be problematic choices, based on how they are grown, and that includes the fish, eggs and cheese that I eat as well.
On climate change: it has been shown (especially recently) to be largely a scam with falsified data, and an agenda having nothing to do with “saving the planet.” That doesn’t mean that the earth isn’t being polluted from the skies to the waters and the very dirt we stand on. I grew up on a small cattle ranch. It’s labor intensive, not very profitable. The monstrous CAFOs don’t care about the conditions of their animals and do whatever it takes to profit. The food system in this country is dreadful and leads to poor nutrition and disease. We need education and complete reform of captured government agencies. I applaud the people who present alternatives to the Standard American Diet.
Who said anything about a raw diet? This is simply a straw man argument. The weight of scientific evidence is overwhelming that eating red meat is harmful, not only is it a listed carcinogen but how it raises the risk of cardio-vascular, metabolic and other diseases. Of the three people you mentioned, none are scientists or researchers, just guys with an opinion. Let’s stick to the science and the real topic of discussion here.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Lynda! Agreed. –Ina, Food Revolution Network Team
I am Vegan and have been for many many years. Once you learn about how animals are usually raised and (mis)treated, it’s a no-brainer in my opinion.
You are against meat consumption. You will find out that being vegan is detrimental to health over time. Even the gurus who have for years promoted the raw food diet and veganism have gotten very sick by having been very nutrient deficient. I’ve followed you for years and went to nutrition school at IIN. The Raw Food World creator Matt Monarch is now not doing the Raw Food diet because he fell to being very nutrient deficient and was hospitalized because of it. He now changed his diet and is doing better. He almost died. He extensively has told his story on YouTube and through e-mails to his audience. You know very well about this and others that have promoted this diet. You know this. I hope you keep this comment on and discuss this very important topic.
Another guru that has changed his diet is Kevin Gianni from Renegade Health. You know about him as well. Was very, very well known. You know the story that he stopped the that diet because of health concerns. I, including many used to follow him. Be honest, this is a brand for you and you have to keep going with it. But on the other side of things, a dangerous thing is The Carnivore Diet. The Carnivore Diet is dangerous because it leaves nutrients out that the body needs. Dr. Paul Saladino used to promote this fully but now has changed to include foods that he once stayed away from. We need to speak about this very important issue on all sides. This means having discussions about the hard stuff and knowing the risks of extremism on all sides. But God put food here and all food we should be thankful for.
For me, nothing beats a tempeh burger!