Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Don't take that last bite – you are destroying the world

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 18 April 2009
TUCKING into a delicious burger may be one of life's luxuries, however, now we should be watching what we eat not just for the sake of our waists but also for the sake of the planet, according to scientists.
Experts have calculated that if everyone in Scotland sheds half a stone, it could save the equivalent amount of greenhouse gas emissions as taking 1.2 million cars off the roads each year.

The study, by scientists at the London School of Hygiene a
nd Tropical Medicine's department of epidemiology and population health, highlights that food production is a major contributor to global warming.

Fertiliser produces nitrous oxides, methane come from cattle and carbon dioxide emissions are produced by agricultural transport.

The researchers claim that a lean population – such as that in Vietnam – will consume almost 20 per cent less food than a population in which 40 per cent of people are obese, similar to the level seen in the United States.

Transport-related emissions will also be lower if people are slim because it takes less energy to move them around.

Dr Phil Edwards, one of the leaders of the study, said that the average weight of a person in the UK has increased by about half a stone in the past 30 years.

In Scotland this will have added about five million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions – the equivalent of adding about 1.2 million cars to the roads.

Dr Edwards said he thought people had a "responsibility to the climate".

"It's about seeing that actually as a population by being a particular shape and by being a certain weight we have an impact on the climate," he said.

"It's something that isn't discussed widely, but not only is staying slim good for you but it's also good for the planet."

He added: "I think the government needs to recognise that population fatness has an environmental effect. That's what is missing from the whole debate."

In the research paper, the authors highlighted that, worldwide, people are becoming fatter, whether in Australia, Argentina, Belgium or Canada.

And Dr Edwards said the situation would be likely to become even worse because in developing countries, where populations are often underweight, many people are also beginning to eat more.

He added: "'When it comes to food consumption, moving about in a heavy body is like driving around in a gas guzzler.

"The heavier our bodies become the harder and more unpleasant it is to move about in them and the more dependent we become on our cars."

The Scottish Government has a target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.

Duncan McLaren, the chief executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, highlighted that people with eating disorders should not be encouraged to lose weight.

He added: "Their point is an absolutely valid one, that a healthy diet can be good for health as well as good for the planet. The idea of a low-carbon diet involves a low-meat diet."

Mr McLaren, who said his own diet was "largely vegetarian" pointed out that losing weight went hand in hand with cycling and walking, which are also good for the environment.

The study appears today in the International Journal of Epidemiology.



SCOTLAND'S BIG ON ILL-HEALTH

SCOTLAND has among the highest obesity levels in the world.

Research last year showed Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles had the highest proportion of patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above – meaning they would be diagnosed as obese.

Obesity places people at risk of serious health consequences, such as diabetes, heart disease and shortened life expectancy.

A BMI of under 20 is underweight, 20-25 is normal and 25-30 is overweight.

The research showed Lothian had the fewest number of obese people, followed by Fife, the Forth Valley, Argyll and Clyde, Ayrshire and Arran, Borders, Greater Glasgow and Highland.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 17 April 2009 9:58 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Climate change , Obesity
 
1

Dark Lochnagar,

http://darklochnagar.blogspot.com 18/04/2009 00:47:20
What a load of methane producing manure! Is this the best you can get to write about..Your insulting our intellegence, FCS.
2

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/04/2009 01:17:43

Why do you think I rant on about what is being proposed in 'connotation's' of madness's??

WELL THIS IS IT!, THIS IS THE RESULTS!

THE ULTIMATE "MADNESS" YOU ALL THOUGHT, WOULD NEVER TAKE PLACE!

BUT BY GOLLY YOUR, "CHARLES LINSKAILL", TOLD YOU ALL SO!!

SOO! Have you last "Bite" and enjoy it!

DID YOU HEAR ME!,...."ENJOY IT"!!

Because NEXT TIME, My dear Freinds, the "Methane Police", WILL be on your back, watching all you do!, and you will get, an 'on-the-spot-fine'!

WHAT NEXT!, YOU ALL ASK?

A £50.00 FINE, FOR KISSING YOUR PARTNER!!

3

Black Sabbath,

18/04/2009 06:08:10
More nanny statist drivel from so-called scientists.

Sod off.
4

JT,

18/04/2009 06:44:21
To the nanny state **** off!! and let us get on with living.
5

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 18/04/2009 06:59:16
Even more scientists on the great global warming gravy train!!
6

RDavis,

Vienna 18/04/2009 07:05:59
I thought this was going to be about increased flatulence as a result of finishing off your meal?
7

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 18/04/2009 07:13:16
It obviously takes more energy to move a large weight around than a small one, particularly when the manner of transport is flying. Maybe then we should consider having part of the cost of a flight ticket being weight related, with the combined weight of both the passenger and the luggage being measured and charged accordingly at take off. With electronic means of charging people this would not need to be any more time consuming than the present weighing of luggage. People who did not wish to be weighed, for any reason, could be charged at the maximum rate for the passenger.
This would also encourage everyone to reduce the amount of luggage they take with them.

These suggestions, of course, have nothing to do with the 'nanny state', but they have everything to do with taking responsibility for one's own actions. That is something that many people, brought up on a junk diet of advertisements continually assuring them that they deserve and need every conceivable luxury ('you're worth it'), obviously will find a little difficult to accept.
8

John Cameron,

St Andrews 18/04/2009 07:48:15
This sort of nonsense incarnates all the nannying, high-taxing, high-spending schoolmarminess of New Labour Britain. Not only has El Gordo wrecked our economy, he has left us with a paranoid, mollycoddled, risk-averse, air bagged society, tormented by political correctness and 'elf 'n' safety fascism. We are not supposed to have children, drive a car, fly down to the sun for our holidays, spend hours sorting our rubbish, and on and on and on. Soon it will be illegal to eat a hamburger. Life would have been more fun if we had lost the war and dear old Adolf was in charge. Or perhaps El Gordo is simply a fat clone of the Austrian clown.
9

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 18/04/2009 08:26:10
Give it a rest Ms Haworth. Utter garbage from a once fine newspaper.
10

Alasdair MacWhirter,

Boiling an egg 18/04/2009 08:46:15
And it is little more that a week since we were being told to buy less food due to the amount being thrown away.
What to do with all these 'last bites' - will they be collected, reshaped and then recycled to customers?
11

P I Staker,

18/04/2009 08:48:18
I bought a deodorant stick today, I'd never used one before, so I read the instructions. They said 'Remove top and slowly push up bottom'.
I'm in Casualty at the moment, but my methane farts smell lovely
12

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 18/04/2009 08:54:57
11

Classic!

Back to the story, the Future:

You will be a criminal for not insulating your home.
You will be limited in travel options
You will be a criminal for being a fatty
You will be judged by your peers
The Marxists have taken over.
13

Unimpressed one,

18/04/2009 09:29:58
Editor: "Hey Jenny, get your skates on. Here's another fantastic story to cover about 'saving the planet'."

JH: "OK, boss, I'll be right on it. What's it about this time - melting ice caps, the demise of the rain forests or the end of life on earth?"

Editor: "It's the best yet. How going on a diet will prevent the earth from over-heating!"

JH: "Aw FFS....."
14

soapy1,

Rainworth 18/04/2009 09:37:37
If a fraction of the money that is wasted on these so called scientific reports was spent on health and education we would have the smartest people with the best equipt and run health service in the world!

Who knows we may even get some intelligent politicians too!
15

El Franko,

18/04/2009 10:03:08
Quote from article: 'highlights that food production is a major contributor to global warming.' Since the globe has been cooling for 10 years, looks like we need a lot more food production. Suits me. I love burgers for example. But, more seriously, what evidence is there that J Haworth exists as other than as a computer bot designed to adapt press releases with the minimum of delay to get them ready for publication? Surely a sentient creature would pause to let their laughter die down a little, before shredding the nonsense in her in-tray and writing an article of her own?
16

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:19:42
"Since the planet has been cooling for something like 10 years..."

Nope.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt

The HADCRU anomalies averaged over five year periods.

1994-1998: + 0.296
1999-2003: + 0.382
2004-2008: + 0.416

So the most recent five year period is warmer than the previous five years, which itself is warmer than the period before that.
17

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:19:52
The GISS anomalies;

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

The anomalies averaged over five year periods.

1994-1998: + 0.38
1999-2003: + 0.45
2004-2008: + 0.53

Again the most recent five year period is warmer than the previous five years, which itself is warmer than the period before that.
18

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:20:06
The HADCRU data;

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt

The ten hottest years worldwide since 1850 were in descending order:

1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2001, 2007, 2008, 1997.

So of the ten hottest years on record, eight have occurred in the last ten years and all have occurred within the last 12.
19

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:20:16
The NASA/GISS data for global temperatures;

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt

The ten hottest years worldwide since 1880 were in descending order:

2005, 2007, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2004, 2001, 2008, 1997.

So of the ten hottest years on record, eight have occurred in the last ten years and all have occurred within the last 12.
20

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:20:27
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/gtc2008.csv

The last decade of the 20th century averaged 0.268°C above the 61-90 baseline.

So far this century is averaging at 0.428°C above the baseline.

It a very safe bet that the first decade of the 21st century will end up the warmest since records began.
21

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:20:38
So the last five years were warmer than the five before, which in turn were warmer than the five before that.

And the first decade of the 21st century will be all but certainly warmer than the last decade of the 20th century, itself the warmest on record.

When average temperature goes up, that's called warming.
22

seanie,

18/04/2009 10:20:56
The scope for natural variability, year to year, is far greater than the underlying warming trend. Variability day to day and month to month is even greater than annual variability, making short term predictions HARDER than longer term ones. So deriving trends across short periods is essentially meaningless; even five year averages aren't necessarily going to show consistent warming. Natural events such as a La Nina or a major volcanic eruption could result in a significant temporary cooling that drives the average down. But even that would not be inconsistent with an underlying warming trend, because such effects are temporary.

The simplest way to filter out the 'noise' of natural variation and identify any trend is to average out temperatures in some way. There are various ways to do it, with varying degrees of complexity, but it's a perfectly straightforward and entirely valid way of interpreting the data that itself doesn't 'promote' any particular result. It just filters out the noise.

So, knowing that, look at the HADCRU and GISS graphs showing 'smoothed' or averaged temperatures.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/gtc2007.pdf

In both cases, is the average temperature (as represented by the smoothed average) higher now than ten years ago?

Yes it is.
23

GlenB,

18/04/2009 10:22:31
"Experts have calculated that if everyone in Scotland sheds half a stone"

A completely meaningless statement when people like me haven't got a spare half stone to shed and there are people who could lose my total weight and still be heavier than me.
24

El Franko,

18/04/2009 10:43:48
seanie #16, #17,#18,#19,#20,#21,#22. You have the conversational table manners of a greenie right enough. Here is a summary graphic of the recent cooling trends, using GISS, Hadcrut, and NOAA data: http://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/trendssince2001.jpg

I would commend this site, and the monthly reports now provided on it, to our more thoughtful readers:
25

El Franko,

18/04/2009 10:44:19
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/

This is the site I meant. Clicked the wrong button just now.
26

seanie,

18/04/2009 11:01:27
As already pointed out, infering trends over short periods is fraught with difficulties; the particular start and end point can have a considerable bearing on the result.

A smoothed average, which can be calculated in a variety of ways, is generally a better guide. And again as pointed out, the smoothed average of both GISS and HADCRU is higher now than ten years ago.

And if the concept of a smoothed average is too difficult to follow consider something a little simpler;

The last five years have been warmer than the five before them, which in turn were warmer than the five before that, which themselves were warmer than the five before.

When average temperatures go up, that's called warming.
27

seanie,

18/04/2009 11:20:29
For good explanantions of the dangers of calculating trends over short periods try the following;

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/01/uncertainty-noise-and-the-art-of-model-data-comparison/

http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2008/01/common-climate-misconceptions-has-global-warming-stopped/
28

seanie,

18/04/2009 11:25:08
For example;

What's the trend for 2001 to 2008 based on HadCRUT3 unadjusted global mean?

http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2001/to:2008/trend

It's going down.

But what's the trend for the decade 1999 to 2008 based on HadCRUT3 unadjusted global mean?

http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1999/to:2008/trend

Oh look. It's shooting up!

As pointed out, the underlying warming trend is smaller than the scope of natural variability. Fitting trend lines to such short periods is not statistically useful, as demonstrated by the links above. Simply changing the start period from 2001 to 1999 produces a very different result.

29

Gdgy,

18/04/2009 11:49:18
Leaving 10 or 20 % of an already cooked and produced burger will not save any carbon.
30

english charlie,

18/04/2009 11:49:22
Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature.
It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming.
But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back.
Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels.
Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts.....s-the-cold
31

english charlie,

18/04/2009 13:15:54
Most CO2s are caused by transporting food from all around the world. I would have thought that burgers were home produced.
32

seanie,

18/04/2009 13:32:19
The trend in northern hemisphere sea ice is downwards, the trend in southern hemisphere ice is upwards.
33

El Franko,

18/04/2009 14:48:43
I suggest thoughtful readers consult this site to make up their own minds about apparent trends on ice at either pole: http://climatedebatedaily.com/ . Scroll down the left hand side to the set of links on 'Sea Ice'. You will see, as ever with ALL greenie scams, that there is no cause for concern whatsoever.
34

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 18/04/2009 17:45:40
#34 El Franko claims "there is no cause for concern whatsoever" about sea-ice extent.

Really? look at this graph of minimum (ie late summer) Northern Hemisphere extent from 1979 (when satellite data became available) to the present, (taken from the site that Franko helpfully links to), here:

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/sea.ice.minimum.2008.html

Does anybody think they might be able to detect a long term trend?

35

EU Exile,

France 18/04/2009 19:49:07
Has anyone noticed how much weight Al 'I invented the internet' Gore has put on since this global warming scam began? I'll bet he eats the last bite of his hamburger.
36

mandyv,

bannitland 20/04/2009 01:25:36
19# with all the new fandangled technology they have now, the weather cannot be prdicted accuratley for a week ahead of time!
There are higher things in the universe that must control the weather, and I do not think it is us mere mortals. Good way to get lots of money though and keep some more jobsworths in employment. But giving all the others who will lose their jobs when the greenies, get their claws in, is another matter.
Was it the greenies who helped to get DDT banned? and millions of people died.

How comes it was warmer well before your records began then?
http://www.lakepowell.net/sciencecenter/background.htm
Background Information
11 Mar 2000 ... The show Raising the Mammoth told the story about a frozen wooly mammoth in Siberia that has been removed in a block of ice ... The dung was dated at over 12000 years old at time period when the vegetation in Glen Canyon was dominated by ... of cloning the mammoth has been raised by Larry Agenbroad.

As for the article, well for those who do not know where it is going, you may find this interesting.
http://www.democracyinstitute.org/pdfs/DI%20Denormalisation%20Study.pdf
snip~
In practise, denormalisation means that the
government attempts to shame adults into
changing their behaviour. For the
government’s denormalisation campaign to
succeed these adults must be stigmatised,II
that is, they will be placed apart from the
rest of civilised society until and unless they
learn to behave in the approved manner.1
Denormalisation pushes gamblers, drinkers,
smokers, and the obese from being a health
hazard to being a moral hazard, nothing less
than blots on the nation’s moral landscape.

You will be telling us all not to breathe soon.

11# Brilliant and funny!
37

Dragonfire,

10/07/2009 04:29:03
So much good land is cleared and allocated for cattle to graze. Little wonder our planet is falling apart.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Would you be tempted to try out a “Male Compression” slimming vest?
Yes, I quite fancy having a flat stomach
No, I’d rather go on a diet and exercise
I don’t need one – I’ve had no complaints

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.