Most of us think of EcoWatch as being a reliable source on environmental issues, but a recent story they published raises concern that their editorial integrity has been co-opted by industrial agricultural interests. There is a name for this: Green washing.
On October 25, 2018 Eco-Watch published an article by Frank Mitloehner titled, Yes Eating Meat affects the Environment, but Cows are Not Killing the Climate.
I realize there are some people who consider themselves environmentalists and still eat
On October 25, 2018 Eco-Watch published an article by Frank Mitloehner titled, Yes Eating Meat affects the Environment, but Cows are Not Killing the Climate.
I realize there are some people who consider themselves environmentalists and still eat
meat. Meat eating can be addictive and it's an entrenched and cherished tradition for many. Might such people (including editors at Eco-Watch) be vulnerable to cherry-picked science that helps them manage the discordance between their values and their choices?
The pro-environment meat-eaters I have met in the past five years -- assure me that they only eat, pasture-raised meat from small farms....never feedlot or CAFO meat. They are also the very same people citing articles that stem from Frank Mitloehner's research to justify that their continued consumption of meat and dairy is not inconsistent with their desire to protect the environment.
That is why I think it is critical to take a look at who Frank Mitloehner is and what exactly he is promoting...AND WHO IS PAYING HIM TO PUSH HIS AGENDA!
Once you look at this issue, the other important question to ask is: WHY did Eco-Watch choose to publish an article from a shill for an industry profiting from the most egregious environmental harms?
On the surface, Mitloehner appears to just be a well-credentialed professor at UCLA -- an academic. But dig deeper and you find Mitloehner's research was funded in part with a quarter million dollars from the meat and dairy industry who admire and refer to him often. Beef Magazine quoted him saying this:
“In my opinion, agriculture needs to be much more proactive than it has been in the past,” Mitloehner says. “I think it’s of critical importance that we continue to be very efficient, and that we not allow those people who want us to go back to the 1950s to take away the tools that have allowed us to get where we are today.”
From the Oklahoma Farm Report, in their Beef Buzz News:
"A study came out earlier this year that declared beef industry the worst of all animal meat proteins when it comes to green house gas emissions in citing old science. Mitloehner said its this type of study that the beef industry needs to be aggressive with as far as pushing back"
An Agri-Pulse article said this:
"Frank Mitloehner, professor of Animal Science at UC-Davis and a UC Cooperative Extension specialist, said California has lost approximately one fourth of its dairies over the last 15 years. His research focuses primarily on air quality related to livestock production and specified that the number of dairy cows in California hasn’t actually decreased, just the number of dairies."
The pro-environment meat-eaters I have met in the past five years -- assure me that they only eat, pasture-raised meat from small farms....never feedlot or CAFO meat. They are also the very same people citing articles that stem from Frank Mitloehner's research to justify that their continued consumption of meat and dairy is not inconsistent with their desire to protect the environment.
That is why I think it is critical to take a look at who Frank Mitloehner is and what exactly he is promoting...AND WHO IS PAYING HIM TO PUSH HIS AGENDA!
Once you look at this issue, the other important question to ask is: WHY did Eco-Watch choose to publish an article from a shill for an industry profiting from the most egregious environmental harms?
On the surface, Mitloehner appears to just be a well-credentialed professor at UCLA -- an academic. But dig deeper and you find Mitloehner's research was funded in part with a quarter million dollars from the meat and dairy industry who admire and refer to him often. Beef Magazine quoted him saying this:
“In my opinion, agriculture needs to be much more proactive than it has been in the past,” Mitloehner says. “I think it’s of critical importance that we continue to be very efficient, and that we not allow those people who want us to go back to the 1950s to take away the tools that have allowed us to get where we are today.”
From the Oklahoma Farm Report, in their Beef Buzz News:
"A study came out earlier this year that declared beef industry the worst of all animal meat proteins when it comes to green house gas emissions in citing old science. Mitloehner said its this type of study that the beef industry needs to be aggressive with as far as pushing back"
An Agri-Pulse article said this:
"Frank Mitloehner, professor of Animal Science at UC-Davis and a UC Cooperative Extension specialist, said California has lost approximately one fourth of its dairies over the last 15 years. His research focuses primarily on air quality related to livestock production and specified that the number of dairy cows in California hasn’t actually decreased, just the number of dairies."
While it's no surprise that media profiting from big ag would give Mitloehner a megaphone to present his biased, environment-harming perspective, it was shocking to see EcoWatch also do this. In contrast to EcoWatch's Green Washing, The Guardian did a really nice investigative piece on Mitloehner AND the failure of most media outlets to more honestly report the bigger story.
And Mark Bittman of the NY Times had this to say:
But even more important than Mitloehner's attack of the FAO's original report -- is that we have even better more comprehensive science published since then...and it further substantiates that giving up meat and dairy is probably the single most impactful thing any individual can do to help the environment:
