Burger is a contraction of hamburger. Hamburger is still the form factor.

Also the hamburger icon is just the 3 lines, the Guardian have added a circle as extra.

Burger is a very generic term. If you can have a hamburger, beefburger, chicken burger and a fish burger i cant see how it could be illegal to call something a veggie burger.

I think food marketing has a greater effect on our food choices than most would be happy to admit or even realise.

Then how's that remedied? That's the problem.

It's far more intractable than the likes of smoking. For example, even with all the controls put in place to pacify the tobacco industry, it appears to be growing (doubling down in markets that are resistant to anti - tobacco sentiment... i.e. China).

I've been naive to the meat industry... It's not like I've had the most poignant epiphany or anything, but I've only just come to realise just how ignorant it is to eat in the fashion that the majority of us omnivores do.

On many levels, what we're doing is pretty fucked up. I think the animal compassion component alone, for me, is an adequate reason to change... I mean, I know many of you dudes are brazen atheists, but religion did make clear from the start how wrong it is to not respect the creatures we prey on...

But then, say we change overnight, and address the amount of land we provide for rearing domesticated animals... Immediately, that will fuck with the quantity of land available for growing veg, you'd also have to consider how you control the population of those animals, and food prices will increase, while stock will decrease (for all foods, right?)...

I'm putting aside my thoughts on classic arguments over AGW here, but I think many of the 97% of scientists (or whatever that figure was), agree that agricultural economics is a far bigger problem than the oil industry...

But where the fuck would you start?

Rationing?

The Daddy wrote:

I don’t think meat is the only problem.

People have forgotten how to cook and eat well because food production has dictated they don't need to because meat is so cheap. Peasant food is the best food because it's about maximising flavour with humble ingredients. I'm talking about making stocks with bones and scraps and using that in other dishes that otherwise contain only vegetables. We've sacrificed convenience for taste even though fridges have never been so full.

Telly chefs will you that you can cook a meal in the same time as it takes to get a take away which is true, but it might be a bit shit and just as environmentally damaging. Yes it's possible but it's difficult. Both parents are working too hard for too long in the pursuit of economic growth and it's fucking everything up and they're passing it on to their kids.

dynamiteReady wrote:

Then how's that remedied? That's the problem. It's far more intractable than the likes of smoking. For example, even with all the controls put in place to pacify the tobacco industry, it appears to be growing (doubling down in markets that are resistant to anti - tobacco sentiment... i.e. China). I've been naive to the meat industry... It's not like I've had the most poignant epiphany or anything, but I've only just come to realise just how ignorant it is to eat in the fashion that the majority of us omnivores do. On many levels, what we're doing is pretty fucked up. I think the animal compassion component alone, for me, is an adequate reason to change... I mean, I know many of you dudes are brazen atheists, but religion did make clear from the start how wrong it is to not respect the creatures we prey on... But then, say we change overnight, and address the amount of land we provide for rearing domesticated animals... Immediately, that will fuck with the quantity of land available for growing veg, you'd also have to consider how you control the population of those animals, and food prices will increase, while stock will decrease (for all foods, right?)... I'm putting aside my thoughts on classic arguments over AGW here, but I think many of the 97% of scientists (or whatever that figure was), agree that agricultural economics is a far bigger problem than the oil industry... But where the fuck would you start? Rationing?

Everything you say here is perfectly reasonable.

In fact, going on your AGW remarks I think there is a fine distinction to be made. Categories which I would include are:

* AGW skeptic, with behaviour that would contribute to greater AGW
* AGW skeptic, with neutral behaviour
* AGW skeptic, who behaves as so as to ameliorate it anyway
* Neutral
* AGW convinced, who behaves to ameliorate it
* AGW convinced, with neutral behaviour
* AGW convinced, with counterprodctive hypocritical behaviour.

The harmful positions are the first and last, and you dont fit in there. So functionally, even if your opinions are contrary to AGW if it is real, you conscience should be clean if your actions aren't harmful.

And I'd say this as someone who probably falls in the last category here, to my shame.

Plant more trees, cultivate more sea grass, save more energy, design better houses and water saving.

Not hard in isolation but certainly on global scale.

That's what the URL says, but not what the article says

Maybe? But the article seems very carefully phrased to suggest not that, vs slightly clickbait URL. (obvs not total clickbait given we're fucked and it's still bad news!)

Some good news at least, an actual, achievable way to combat climate change, plant a trillion trees.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions

Not exactly climate change, and no idea about the veracity of the claims, but this piece on recycling vs landfill certainly raised a few points I’d never considered:

https://medium.com/@robertwiblin/what-you-think-about-landfill-and-recycling-is-probably-totally-wrong-3a6cf57049ce

Bit warm innit? Fair play London badgers, drink lots of beer.

I can’t sleep in this heat. Fucking 25 degrees at night, what is this madness?

I was in that London today. Bloody ridiculous heat. And the air con was broken on the train home.

It was rough earlier. It hit 32 here according to accuweather but I'm also on the same road as the train station so at rush hour, with gridlock traffic, it was definitely hotter than that.