Burger King faces legal claim over size of Whopper
www.bbc.co.uk
The fast food giant is accused of making the burger appear larger on menus than it actually is.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/2089880

Archived version: https://archive.ph/LagwN
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230830080638/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66654440

  • nestEggParrot@lemmy.sdf.org
    ·
    1 year ago

    Plants are part of that environment and you have to kill them to eat? *unless you are picking off fallen ripe fruits like roadkill eaters.

    Also cultivation of those plants you eat are done in large cleared areas and are destructive to the environment.

    • library_napper@monyet.cc
      ·
      1 year ago

      These things can be quantified in terms of co2 equivalents and water used per kg of food produced.

      Eating plants (even root veggies when killing them) is magnitudes better for the planet than eating animals that eat plants.

      • nestEggParrot@lemmy.sdf.org
        ·
        1 year ago

        While i agree to the points it still stands that the majority of CO2 and methane(a more potent greenhouse gas) are part of the carbon cycle that has been relatively stable.

        It is not comparable to the dumping of carbon from fossil fuels. This is something many collate together and make disingenuous arguments. Correct me where I am wrong in understanding this.

        One additional point(though i have no exact statistics) per kg isnt comparable between plants and meat. Large portions of plant are not edible and used as fertilizers or cattle feed at best. Meat is also energy dense and hence required in far less quantities than carbohydrates.

        Not to mention water isnt equally distributed. Doing intensive agriculture in drought prone areas are far worse than cattle raised in water rich regions.

        I would be interestsed in finding a study that takes a wide array of factors and calculates the effects.