Thread by @DMDent

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones Not much of a researcher, or you'd KNOW this is not driven by meat as such but by China, because they are losing own pasture at rate 1.5 mill hectares a yr for industrial production WEF mass tat, so they need feed. Certainly NOT cows & sheep (pets consume almost as much), and

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones most feed is waste crop. Even Oatly couldn't hid their waste, also used for pig feed: so the feed pigs a result of the waste not vice versa. Review of FAO study here
cgiar.org/news-events/ne… Sustainable Food Trust here:
sustainablefoodtrust.org/articles/dairy…

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones So how many farms you been to? Me, over 1000 all over Europe, and sourced produce from livestock peoples globally all these places for eg. None will be fed soya. Indeed, I have also studied & sourced leather goods from Brazil/Argentina. and they, it may surprise you to know, do

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones not eat soya to speak of either. Source: de Silva et al but I already knew it. 90% their herd pasture fed. This is what you call research, but here it is in digestible form for you carbonbrief.org/higher-beef-pr…
The deforestaion is for land speculation , usually for soya but many other

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones crops too such as sugar, coffee, corn, cotton and significantly rice an area almost double size Wales now under cultivation when they were a net importer. Cattle may go in to graze these areas first to flatten & fertilize. But Brazil has all the pasture it needs without

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones further deforestation, and was always associated with conservation efforts in fact; even the WWF used to have that as policy so what happened to them? Ahh...money. An absolute farce, when for eg H&M BROKE sustainable fashion with their mass tat, and IKEA broke durable furniture

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones So H&M rely largely synthetics & cotton, both of which a scourge on planet & inferior textiles/hide, and 90% of textiles are now those, driving fashions 10% rising global emissions, & China's fossil fuel use for that mass tat, and resulting pasture loss = that soya feed. So the

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones So that is ACTUAL research. The potential for wool etc to thus lessen reliance on all that fossil fuel, evaproration of an entire sea in case of cotton, lessen reliance on landfill, is considerable because its durable so less production needed, insulating, AND feeds people. But

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones also livestock used to provide tallow fats not only for all cooking/bakery products, but also soap, candles, & cosmetics, & not even so called animal friendly cosmetics (in part responsible driving world to insanity of palm oil) cant find a better alternative than lanolin. The

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones palm oil problem re deforestation is significant. Indonesia, having already screwed up with mega rice project (forest size Belgium gone), are driving much of that (also in Guatemala & driving sheep herders etc off land so hence responsible for migration to US, NOT climate change)

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones Put palm oil is not the only deforester in Indonesia. Plywood, you know, for that oh so caring IKEA chain working with WWF, also a driver, and engaged elsewhere eg Ukraine in deforestation. WHAT A FARCE! The people who BROKE sustainable furniture made to last!

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones It gets worse re palm oil with WWF variety projects one of the WORST palm oil users. Are people STUPID they can't see the degree of this stitch up? 100k orangutans gone in 16 yrs & WWF greenwashing the companies doing it WTF? We do NOT NEED PALM OIL and most of us over 50 will

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones have been brought up without it. Livestock can provide those fats, wrongly demonized through now proven fraudulent science re fats. So for eg my aunt worked for cosmetics company at time where transition was taking place, and she continued to make her own lipstick from

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones beeswax & butter, & cochineal that came in from Peru with alpaca shipments which added softness to our wool fabrics, thus helping Peruvian peoples. Hence we will rarely get a synthetic lipstick as RED. Corporates wanted something cheaper, & it wasn't the same quality be it

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones eco damaging & slave labour (of monkeys as well as humans) abusing coconut oils, or synthetic chemicals. Indeed latter are implicated in perfumes too with damage to unborn infants, when again, perfumes once used musk from livestock (& lasted as a result didn't 'go off' so quickly

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones So tbh I doubt you have even done your research on perfumes etc. One thing for sure, Louise Brooks wouldn't have been wearing any of that synthetic crap on her face neck or body: her famous sheepskin coat case in point. Science tech & global corporates are the problem, and they

@AddictPerfume @damonrudd @GMB @1GarethWynJones have reigned ecological destruction on planet, & our health,& farcically try to stitch up livestock. If you cared about deforestation, & animals, you'd do a bit more 'research', including in to who funding these Orwellian doublethink narratives. Start here
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1387378…