More reasons we don't need CAFOs

Today I stumbled across two resources which support Thomas Kemp's skepticism about CAFOs, confined animal feeding operations.

First, there is The Cow? Public Enemy Number One, which describes a UN report detailing the massive damage of cattle level on the environment. The report concludes that unless drastic changes are made, the damage done by livestock will more than double by 2050, along with expected increases in meat consumpton.

Second, a complementary view: the benefits of a diet free of meat and diary. This is the The China Study, which uses a number of scientific studies to advocate for a vegan diet. It is not without controversary, including cheerleaders and detractors.

The combination of these articles serve as important reminders: First, there are ill effects of livestock, whether they are confined or not. Second, when the demand for meat decreases, so does the need for CAFOs to exist at all. Our consumption and grocery store decisions make a difference.

As a personal disclaimer: I have meat-free and low-diary diet, and it has worked very well for me, including endurance athletic activities.