Grass fed beef verses grain fed beef Essay Example

cattle.

A study comparing grass-fed cattle and grain-fed cattle found a 30% increase in harvest age. Research conducted by Pezza (14) indicates a more than 500% increase in greenhouse gas emissions per pound of beef produced from grass-fed cattle compared to grain-fed cattle, leading to greater environmental impact due to uncontrolled nitrogen and phosphate release. Additionally, grass-fed cattle consume over 30% more water and require over 30% more land than grain-fed counterparts. To address these concerns, Canadian researchers have developed a model considering carbon loss from fossil fuels during corn production and other factors related to both types of cattle production.

The model demonstrates that intensive grain feeding in animal production enhances efficiency and reduces environmental impact when compared to grass-fed beef. There are two primary arguments concerning grass-fed and grain-fed beef. One argument asserts that grass-fed beef contains higher amounts of conjugated linoleic acid, which has been shown in laboratory studies to inhibit tumor growth in mice. Additionally, proponents argue that grass-fed beef possesses lower cholesterol levels. However, the cholesterol content in grass-fed beef is always equivalent to that found in grain-fed beef; this notion originated as an unverified rumor. Other foods such as eggs, shellfish, and venison possess higher cholesterol levels than beef but minimal fat content, indicating that fat content is not determined by cholesterol content. The false labeling of cholesterol content has resulted in numerous legal issues and caused distress among many individuals.

Despite the narrative surrounding conjugated linoleic acid and its potential as a powerful anti-carcinogen, consumers may be deceived due to the difference in raw meat usage between grass-fed beef and grain-fed beef. Both types of beef contain nearly equal amounts of

conjugated linoleic acid when consumed raw. This means that a typical grass-fed steak has a similar level of conjugated linoleic acid as Certified Angus Beef, which is fed with grains. Additionally, cooking meat results in a loss of fat content that is comparable between both grass-fed and grain-fed varieties. Therefore, there is no distinction in terms of conjugated linoleic acid content between these two types of beef (Moody 24). It's important to note that cattle are raised in different environments and slaughtered at varying intervals after birth.

Grass-fed beef takes longer to harvest compared to grain-fed beef due to the extended growth period of grass-fed cattle. To become a grass-fed animal, a calf must be fed with other resources for at least 8 weeks, whereas grain-fed animals can be fed after just two weeks from birth. It is not advisable to slaughter a calf soon after birth as it is not suitable for consumption. While beef cattle typically have a natural lifespan of twenty to twenty-five years, they are usually slaughtered around 18 months old. On the other hand, grain-fed cattle require less time than grass-fed beef to be ready for slaughter, with grain-fed cattle being prepared for the slaughterhouse approximately one year after birth.

According to Dunbar (17), grass-fed cattle take about eight months longer to be slaughtered compared to grain-fed beef. Numerous studies have demonstrated a strong connection between cancer and conjugated linoleic acid. In a recent experiment, mice were administered different doses of conjugated linoleic acid, and 75% of those receiving high amounts developed cancer. This particular study highlighted that an individual would have to consume 176 pounds of grass-fed beef every day in

order to reach the same level of conjugated linoleic acid given to the mice.

The World Health Organization emphasizes the importance of considering the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 when consuming fats. According to Hartman's research (78), the recommended daily intake of Omega 3 is between 1.1 and 1.6 grams, which can be achieved by consuming a significant amount of grass-fed, cooked beef each day. However, solely relying on grass-fed beef for its Omega 3 content does not necessarily guarantee improved human health. Consumer science studies highlight that food safety should also be taken into account when making purchasing decisions. Advertisements promoting grass-fed beef often state that it does not cause E. coli infections in humans who consume it.

The occurrence of infectious E. coli in the intestinal tract of livestock is a concerning issue in various feedlots and grasslands as it misleads consumers regarding safety (Cartel 145). Processing companies must implement additional precautions to prevent meat contamination. Overall, there are differences between grass-fed beef and beef that has been fed both grass and grain in terms of factors such as time for maturation, health effects, and environmental consequences. Grain-fed beef surpasses grass-fed beef in terms of its positive impact on health and the environment.

Proof must be provided when evaluating beef products to determine which is superior in terms of being less toxic or more nutritious. Factors such as the state of the economy, media information, and feedback from friends heavily influence customers' choice of beef. A community surrounded by false and misleading information will struggle to sustain and attract new consumers. Promoting green-fed products requires considering crucial factors including animal upbringing conditions, pasture environment,

and source verification.

Work Cited

1. Cartel, Janzen. Raising of cattle. Harlow, England: Pearson Longhorn, 2010.
2. Dunbar, Steinberg. Healthy beef consumption. London: Oxford Maxwell Publishing, 2009.
3. Hartman, David. "Grass fed beef verses Grain fed beef." Telling the story of grass fed beef (2016): 23-25.
4. Moody, Stuart.

"Raising Cattle for Dairy and Beef." Cattle Keeping (2014): 14-17. Kim Pezza's book, The North American counterpart of our Smallholding (2014), published by John Wiley & Sons in New York.