Thread on #lysine#upcycling#ruminants 1/9 Only 4% of the feed consumed by the global domestic ruminant herd is *potentially* human-utilizable. The upcycling of the other 96% into resources that are essential to modern (& future) societies is under-appreciated.
2/9 Note:
- The grain fed represents only 10% of the global cereal production.
- 1/4 of the grain fed is off-grade & not human edible.
Source for this & previous slide.
Mottet, et al., (2018) cambridge.org/core/journals/…
3/9 In the US, only 11% of the lifetime feed consumed by a commercial fed steer is *potentially* human-utilizable.
Rotz, et al., (2019) sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
4/9 Let's look at the upcycling of just one globally-limiting essential nutrient in humanity's diet - lysine - based upon these assumptions:
6/9 US commercial beef cattle yield almost two and a half times more human-utilizable lysine than they consume.
7/9 We must evaluate yield/impacts/efficiency with more sophisticated metrics than gross [crude] protein or caloric conversions & supplies. Differences in bioavailability, land suitability for production, etc. must be considered or misleading conclusions will direct policy, etc.
8/9 Moughan (2021) has demonstrated how "The metrics matter" and "...illustrate[s] how calculations and representations, where the nutritional nuances are not fully reflected in the calculations, can lead to misleading conclusions with potentially serious implications."
Herdmates, it's time to dive into the rumen and its microbiome. Not literally, of course. That would be nasty.
(Thank you, Dr, Eenennaam, for the image) @BioBeef 1/4
Tim A McAllister, PhD is Episode 62's guest. Dr. McAllister is a Research Scientist in Ruminant Nutrition & Microbiology with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Lethbridge, Alberta.
Watch -
2/4
1/6 In case it comes up.
Global sector percentages of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions should not be used in discussions of individual country's sectors. epa.gov/ghgemissions/g…
2/6 The %s in the US (which contributes 15% of the global total) looks very different than the global total for a number of reasons: Nature of economy; Population; Efficiency of ag; Fuel sources; Standard of living; etc. epa.gov/ghgemissions/i…
3/6 In the US, ag is included with forestry and land us changes in the accounting of emissions. When the sequestration is accounted for, that sector more than offsets its emissions. The only sector to do so. Today. epa.gov/ghgemissions/i…
1/n Food for thought:
An understanding of metabolic health and a species appropriate diet hasn't informed conversations about sustainable health care. The "downstream" effects of food choices are usually informed by the received wisdom of the official "healthy diet."
What if:
2/n So what if, just speculating wildly here, what if there was a way for people with T2D to stop using those medications? I know, that sounds like crazy-talk, but hear me out.
Big numbers and unfamiliar units are sometimes hard to visualize, so here's one equivalent:
3/n And another (I'll add more).
Remember:
- These figures are *just* for the diabetes pharmaceuticals
- These figures do not include medications for related metabolic diseases.
Please note: These are preliminary figures. I've asked folks to check my work.
Real World vs biophobic #TechnoUtopianists.
1a
"Livestock are critical for sustainable development yet often overlooked. The world’s cows, sheep, goats, pigs, poultry and other farm animals are the mainstay of livelihoods across the developing world. ... "
1b
"... And the energy and nutrient-dense milk, meat and eggs these animals produce provide hundreds of millions of families in the world’s poorer countries with basic livelihoods, incomes, food and nutrition." whylivestockmatter.org
2a
"Globally, livestock contribute about 40% of agricultural GDP and provide livelihoods and incomes for at least 1.3 billion people worldwide. ... " whylivestockmatter.org/economic-oppor…
1/5
Food for Thought (especially for the rural #Ruminati):
“Diabetes prevalence is about 15 to 17 percent higher in rural areas than in urban areas..."
2/5
"in rural areas, the likelihood of dying due to diabetes-related hospitalizations was 3.4 percent higher in rural areas than in large central metropolitan areas..."
3/5
"Mortality rates were highest within the rural areas of the South and Midwest regions (21.0 and 15.1 deaths per 100,000 population, respectively)... "