From: Amadeus Schmidt
> I've also my own ideas what to do with land that could be freed if more
> people switched to more plants in the diet.

If it were only that simple.  Over 65% of the worlds arible land is
unsuitable for growing plant crops.  If this land could support plants
the
farmers would grow them as they are far more profitable than raising
meat.

Feed lot cattle are fed almost exclusively grain that has been deemed
unfit
for human consumption because of contamination by aflatoxins, other
molds
and rusts, rat feces, insects, etc.  Because of factors inherent in
production and distrubution, these affect a large part of these crops.
Because of the market for this grain as animal feed, meat eaters
actually
subsidise grain producers.  If more people ate less meat, the price of
all
food would increase dramatically worldwide resulting in the deaths of
millions if not billions of people.

Of course, under such a senario, some would benifit.  Those who
controlled
plant crop production would become far richer than even the agrarRay
Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
http://www.neanderthin.comian potentates of old.  That why corporate
interests (Kellogg, ADM, Cargil, etc.) do so much to promote the vegan
cause.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
http://www.neanderthin.com