Results: Lettuce is "3 times worse" for the environment than bacon

Eating a healthier diet rich in fruit and vegetables could actually be more harmful to the environment than consuming some meat, a US study has claimed. Does it surprise you that eating a diet focused on fruits and vegetables is actually more harmful to the environment than eating meat?

Lettuce is "over three times worse in greenhouse gas emissions than eating bacon", according to researchers from the Carnegie Mellon University who analyzed the impact per calorie of different foods in terms of energy cost, water use and emissions. If you are one of those intent on doing your part to save the environment, are you willing to eat more bacon and fewer vegetables?

Published in the Environment Systems and Decisions journal, the study goes against the grain of recent calls for humans to quit eating meat to curb climate change. They found that eating only the recommended "healthier" foods prescribed in recent advice from the US Department of Agriculture increased a person's impact on the environment across all three factors – even when overall calorie intake was reduced. Does it surprise you to hear that the government agency, The Department of Agriculture, recommended an activity that is more harmful to the environment - and therefore agriculture?

The experts examined how growing, processing and transporting food; sales and service; and household storage and use all take a toll on the environment for different foods. Paul Fischbeck, study co-author and CMU's professor of social and decisions sciences, said: "Lots of common vegetables require more resources per calorie than you would think. Have you ever considered the environmental impact of eating vegetables?

"Eggplant, celery and cucumbers look particularly bad when compared to pork or chicken." The initial findings of the study were "surprising", according to senior research fellow Anthony Froggatt at Chatham House, an independent think-tank which is currently running a project looking at the link between meat consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Are you shocked to learn the consumption of meat is not as villainous to the environment as environmentalists claim?

An example given to illustrate the findings: maintaining calorie intake but completely shifting to healthy foods increased energy use by 43 per cent, water use by 16 per cent and emissions by 11 per cent. Therefore, do you think the environmental extremists that like to draw attention to themselves should start throwing paint on vegetarian/vegan food markets and chaining themselves to the "healthy food" shelves to prevent people from eating healthy and therefore harming the environment?