The 9 Paradoxes of the EU Farm to Fork Strategy

The European livestock sector presents in this video "The 9 paradoxes of Farm to Fork" and a call to actively participate in the current sustainability challenge to develop and implement an effective and adequate Farm to Fork strategy for Europe.

Born from an initiative of Carni Sostenibili and European Livestock Voice, the video was launched simultaneously in 7 European languages: Belgium, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Portugal and Poland.
The paradoxes outlined highlight the fact that despite good intentions, the Farm to Fork strategy does not take into consideration the current situation and challenges of the livestock sector. But the whole livestock value chain is willing to be actively involved in the great green transition process, now in progress.

Interested parties are welcome to share this video to support the European livestock value chain's call for improved dialogue and recognition.

[tommasobrazzini]

There are several inaccuracies in this video. As always, when the crisis is systemic, you can always make cherry picking with the information most suitable for your objective (e.g. externalizations are not considered). Although I agree the farm to fork strategy has several complexities, I wouldn't agree with all the things said here. Considering who is producing this video, however, I'm definitely not surprised

[Alexandre-xqom]

🖍Nuance of the statements
There are actually numerous mistakes:
1) Yes the development of the brain is part due to meat, but today, scientists say our consumption is by far superior to what we need (in developed countries)
2) The fact that the land dedicated to meat has been constant for 50 years is due to importations, particularly South America (as you can see on the graphe)
3) Animals don't only grow with the residus of crops, since they use a LOT of fiels dedicated to the culture of corn and soy for example
4) The PROBLEM with GHG emissions of livestock is not mainly due to CO2 but essentially to methane (CH4) which is 25 TIMES more powerful as GHG than CO2. And it's mainly from cattle.

🖍Nevertheless, animal husbandry fulfills (of course) numerous functions, and we shouldn't stop producing meat.

If I were the video's author, I would have rather militated for:
- a meat tax at the borders of EU in order to end unfair competition
- more transparency & pedagogy to show the bring of the livestock sector

[Thomas-chdo]

your Slogan is "when you make a choice, you also choose all of the consequences"

If you create a video with such incomplete and false statements, you will cause damage because some people would think it is the truth.

[ZeroBene]

So sad.. The information depicted here is very wrong. I am shocked by this CRUEL PR move. For example Chapter 2 on Land Use: The land use in europe for livestock feed production might have stayed the same, but we are importing so much animal feed from South America now. We reinforce the people there economically to destroy the rainforest. For example in germany we have only 40% of the land needed to feed the huge lifestock. Just to name a number: We have 40 million pigs that are constantly raised and killed. For the nutritional part: Sure, meat consumption proofed useful for humans back in the days, but now we are not dependent on it, especially not on the huge amounts that we are producing... Actually humans have mostly eaten plants, which can also be seen by our teeth which are more like the ones of plant eating animals, and not carnivors. The amount we are consuming on average right now actually harms our health, red meat is a probable carcinogen and produced meat is a safe carcinogen. Also it leads to cardiovascular disease. Moreover animal welfare regulations might be better in Europe than in other parts of the world, still the animals are having a horrible life. Most of them of course not living outside like suggested in the video, but traped inside, never able to move freely, or feel wind on their skin. Furthermore the goal of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to reduce meat and dairy consumption to a healthy and sustainable level, nobody wants to import livestock products from outside the EU or completely abandon livestock. Food Security is clearly threatened by livestock production and not secured.. It is very inefficient in land, and water use.. Paradoxically the video made a reference to the pandemie. The huge amount of antibiotica used to prevent diseases in huge livestock "halls" actually makes it very likely that antibiotica resistent diseases will develop, as the antibiotica is still in the meat we consume.The environmental part is complete nonsense. Our huge Livestock production is clearly proofen to destroy local ecosystems, because huge amounts of water are needed, and all the pig shit is put in the ecosystems. This is way too much nitrat, and our ecosystems can't handle it well, rivers, plants and species are suffering from it and dying out. Also - obviously - the land would not rot if we would not use it for livestock.. we could grow crops for human consumption there, let forests grow and wildlife florish, or use it otherwise. 2/3 of the global land that can be used by agriculture is taken for livestock. If we would grow food for humans there, a lot more calories, and also rich in protein calories, could be produced. For every human on earth there are three chickens. Livestock vs wildlife mammals is about 15 to 1. In Germany we have 80 billion people, and 40 million pigs. That they need a lot of water, and food, as well as produce a lot of shit should be clear. I could go on and on, if somebody has questions please ask. I can also back up my claims by citing several works of top scientists and institutions, that are neutral and do not have any interest in keeping or reducing livestock.. I am very happy if my post just convinces one person that this video is very suspicious and wrong. It is clearly PR which does not respect the negative impacts of livestock at all, and also doesn't value honesty. Shame on you guys who produced it. Sure you got a lot of money for doing that. Maybe you also see the needs of the livestock farmers who have invested their money in that kind of business, but probably the money you get is from big, big livestock industry players, that could - instead of spreading lies - accept the reality that we need to reduce meat production and consumption for our health, food security, biodiversity and climate. Rather invest it in changing the system, making new sustainable business. And you PR guys should really use your skills in a honest way and/or work for a different industry...

[NicoloMVilla]

THIS IS DISINFORMATION. First, it claims that meat contains everything you need and allowed us to evolve a bigger brain while that is false and it overlooks the drawbacks of eating meat. The drawbacks range from zoonosis (disease transmitted through animals) to cholesterol. Second, land use changed drastically with issues for animal welfare and it doesn't consider the global market and socio-economical differences among consumer. Also, animals convert about 10% of what they eat into biomass and we don't eat the whole animal. In short, you need to grow 10 times the mass of the meat you eat. Third, it's bullshit that the land left without farmers is degraded. Go see a olive tree garden or many other practices. Try leave an orchard unkept. Plants will take over in a matter of weeks while farming uses fertilisers, pesticides, the energy for machines, it uses more water than anything else and reduces biodiversity! If you have a crop that produces more, you cultivate that because it's a commodity! ....this is too much bullshit to continue correcting it...

[raoulluijten]

HAHAHA livestock voice, not like you would be biased towards... livestock.

[andreabertaglio]

Finally, someone with a realistic approach, going beyond slogans and apparently easy solutions to complex issues.

[DirkDrHesse]

VERY GOOD! Is it possible to have the video with a german spaeker?

[manueldeprado]

Great job. To be use without moderation.