jenniferalicechandler

02/19/24

Let Them Eat Bugs

I started reading the article, “The Biggest Problem With Eating Insects Isn’t the “Ew” Factor.” under the false assumption that the article was going to take the subject seriously. Perhaps I should have known better. Instead it’s once again woke propaganda. This time they are trying to sell us on adding bugs to our daily diet. And why should we do that exactly? Apparently, in some cultures they are already eating bugs, so that apparently automatically makes it “healthy” for all people. The fact that people who routinely consume bugs probably have digestive systems that have adapted to the bugs and the rest of us do not couldn’t possibly be an area of concern. But then there is that study the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) funded in Africa of course — since people seem to love to experiment on the Africans apparently — to see the health effects of bug consumption on children (Tovey, 2022). So, maybe it being healthy isn’t such an undisputed sure thing? Also, I wonder if people are eating bugs because they want to or because they have to in order to survive.

Another bonus listed in the article is that “a maggot-like organism” tasted like peanuts. Well then, why not just eat peanut butter? What happened to vegetarian diets by the way? Why lab meat? Why bugs? The author writes about what a great protein source bugs are, and we can’t have animal proteins any more as “factory farms are an environmental disaster.” (Matthews, 2021)  Apparently conditions can’t be improved. Because of the methane gas the cows release the cows have to go. Still, it’s hard for me not to think about the Nord Stream pipeline. It released a lot more methane than cows, and the reaction to that disaster was tame compared to the horror over the cow farts. The author does have one concern it seems — one problem that he will allow and alluded to in his article’s title. This was where I was hoping he would take the topic seriously. Instead he’s apparently concerned about the welfare of the bugs. After all, people “are constantly expanding our circle of moral concern” (Matthews, 2021) according to the author. Why, someone in the past killed their pets rather than board them in order to take a trip according to him. Only how does he explain how millions of people have had and/or support abortions on fetuses who are capable of experiencing pain and certainly experience a shortened lifespan as a result? He writes of insects that are being killed in farms at about the rate of a trillion per year, “I don’t know for sure whether those insects feel pain — but if there’s even a small chance they do, the scale of the suffering that would imply is massive.” (Matthews, 2021) Now maybe this guy isn’t pro-abortion and isn’t a hypocrite who waxes concern over the suffering of insects without empathy at all for human beings and their pain and shortened life expectancy.

But that’s really the point. There is no consideration for humans in the lets-eat-bugs article — not really. He calls it healthy and says it’s a good source of protein, but the overriding impression I got from the article is a guilt trip that implies your existence is harming the earth and the least you can do is eat bugs to undo some of the damage your life has done. Who cares if the idea of eating bugs makes most people gag and reduces their morale? Trudeau’s government in Canada may be expanding access to the facilitation of suicides in that country, so perhaps this will help with that. (Bryden, 2021)

Meanwhile, I have concerns beyond the welfare of the bugs. First, what happens to the cats and dogs? I’m assuming the shift to bugs won’t be voluntary — that they plan on shutting down meat production or at least greatly restrict it. So are the cats and dogs expected to eat bugs, too? The article vaguely references farm animals eating bugs as well as it being ground into some pet food but that certainly has not been proven as viable on a large scale. A Wikipedia article states, “A limited, but growing number of products are available on the market, including insect-based cat food, dog food, and pet treats.” (“Insect-based pet food,” 2024) The article on Wikipedia mentions that there are health concerns with the insects commonly ingested by humans. A table based on the results of two studies lists the following potential risks: hormones, cyanogentic substances, heavy metal contamination, allergic, thiaminase, high bacterial count, antinutritional factors (tannin, phytate), Chagas disease, and Myiasis. (“Insect-based pet food,” 2024) The Wikipedia article suggests that the concerns can be mitigated. “Allergic hazards can be labelled (sic) on the packaging to avoid consumption by susceptible consumers. Selective farming can be used to minimize chemical hazards, whereas microbial and parasitical hazards can be controlled by cooking processes.” (“Insect-based pet food,” 2024)  Members of the media have already been hinting around about pets having an undesirable carbon footprint nicknamed carbon pawprint. Kimberly Richardson from CNN actually wrote an article declaiming, “researchers have showed that pets play a significant role in the climate crisis.” (Richardson, 2022) The article goes on to tout insects and lab meat for dogs as well as steering people away from adopting large dogs. It’s ironic, therefore, that Matthews spends so much time in his article making the case how people “are constantly expanding our circle of moral concern” (Matthews, 2021) in part by citing drops in pet euthanasia. I wonder what will happen to these pets when their food supply is eliminated? After all, according to Richardson, “if you’re the proud owner of a feline, you shouldn’t even think about switching their diet. Cats are obligate carnivores — they must eat meat, according to Angela Frimberger, a veterinarian with Vets for Climate Action.” (Richardson, 2022)

Kimberly Richardson from CNN, like many who have called out cats and dogs over climate change, insists that “Bidding farewell to your best friends is not the answer.”
(Richardson, 2022) And yet she considers carbon dioxide which is emitted when mammals breathe as one of the “planet-warming gases.” (Richardson, 2022) The article only lists the feeding of dogs and cats as a problem, which I assume is a calculation of how much carbon dioxide livestock produces. How long will it be before they calculate how much carbon dioxide the pets themselves emit? What about human beings? As an aside, carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring gas essential to life on this planet. Plants require it to survive.

The CNN article also mentions, “you might consider smaller breeds or species if you’re aiming to minimize your impact on the planet. A Chihuahua’s carbon pawprint will be much smaller than a Saint Bernard, for example.” (Richardson, 2022) Kimberly Richardson quotes Gudrun Ravetz with Vet Sustain as saying, “Avoiding animals with known health problems will reduce the need for veterinary intervention, which has a carbon footprint, and most importantly will reduce unnecessary suffering in terms of poor health and welfare.” (Richardson, 2022) So, what happens exactly to those pets not adopted? It’s disingenuous to pretend they won’t be euthanized.

What happens to the dairy? Dairy cows emit methane, too. So, are they all to be slaughtered and dairy eliminated from the diet as well?

The social ramifications … call me crazy, but I don’t see the elites of this world eating bugs. The effect of separating out the middle and lower classes for inferior treatment would seem to be the dehumanization of the lower classes. In other words, it will contribute to our being viewed as lesser beings than the global elite.

Coercion anyone? As I’ve said, this is unlikely to be voluntary if it comes into being. They are unlikely to invest their money in something most people won’t participate in by choice. Instead, I imagine they will cut the supply of meat to the point where it’s unaffordable for most people if it’s not banned outright. Then, the people will be forced toward alternatives such as lab meat and bugs. And how exactly does cutting the food supply mitigate starvation?

Of course, until it’s implemented it’s all theoretical and may not happen. But propaganda articles such as this one are troubling since it appears to be paving the way for bugs as a dietary staple for the lower and middle classes in the future.

Bryden, Joan. “Government agrees mentally ill should have access to assisted dying — in 2 years.” The Canadian Press, 23 February 2021, https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/maid-bill-senate-amendments-1.5924163.

Insect-based pet food. (2024, January 9). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect-based_pet_food#cite_note-:5-9

Matthews, Dylan. “The Biggest Problem With Eating Insects Isn’t the “Ew” Factor.” Vox, 19 June 2021, https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-biggest-problem-with-eating-insects-isn-t-the-ew-factor.

Richardson, Kimberly. “Our pets are part of the climate problem. These tips can help you minimize their carbon pawprints.” CNN, 27 September 2022, https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/15/us/pets-climate-impact-lbg-wellness/index.html.

Tovey, Mark. “UK urges hunger-stricken African nations to farm insects.” The Guardian, 2 September 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/02/let-them-eat-bugs-uk-urges-hunger-stricken-african-nations-to-farm-insects.