Dozens of experts were asked to look into the science behind claims that meat eating causes disease and is harmful for the planet in a special issue of a journal called Animal Frontiers. They have warned against a widespread societal push towards plant-based diets, arguing that poorer communities with low meat intake often suffer from stunting, wasting and anemia driven by a lack of vital nutrients and protein.
Thousands of scientists across the globe have also joined The Dublin Declaration, a group stating that livestock farming is too important to society to “become the victim of zealotry.” They say that many of the negative claims about meat in our diet are simply not true.
The Dublin Declaration group has published a statement allowing global signatories to join them in defending meat supported diets and contradicting common claims made by establishment institutions against livestock in agriculture. In particular, the scientists stress that meats provide vitamin B12 intake in human diets, play a major role in supplying retinol, omega-3 fatty acids and minerals such as iron and zinc, as well as important compounds for metabolism, such as taurine and creatine. There is no vegan equivalent that fills these nutritional needs and a number of supplements are often required to keep them healthy.
Scientists note that only well resourced (wealthier) people have the means to abandon meat in their diets and consume vegetables and carbs alone. In other words, veganism is a first world ideology that is impractical for the majority of the global population. Even India, a developing nation often cited by anti-meat activists for its religious stance against killing animals, still has a 70% meat eating population.
Previous studies (such as the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factor Study, published in The Lancet in 2020) warning against the “dangers” of meat are also being debunked. Dr Alice Stanton, of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, one of the authors of a review of anti-meat claims, notes:
“The peer-reviewed evidence published reaffirms that [the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Risk Factors Report] which claimed that consumption of even tiny amounts of red meat harms health is fatally scientifically flawed…In fact, removing fresh meat and dairy from diets would harm human health. Women, children, the elderly and low income would be particularly negatively impacted.”
The anti-meat movement most likely finds its roots in astroturf. Pro-vegan research tends to be funded by globalist institutions like the UN and the WEF, which have made clear that they want meat to become a “rare treat” rather than a dietary staple.
This would be accomplished by a number of means, but a primary tool would be emissions taxation on farmers and agricultural products leading to artificially higher prices. The UN hopes to ward much of the populace away from meat by making it unaffordable. This is similar to the tactic they have recommended for pushing people away from “fossil fuels.” If price is a problem and you still need protein, the globalists suggest fake meat (which is more expensive than real meat for now), or shifting to a third world diet and eating bugs instead.
The UN says its goal is to enforce a completely meat and dairy free human diet by 2050 in order to “fight climate change,” though they have been caught in the past greatly exaggerating how much livestock methane contributes to overall emissions. Even if you believe that there is a real climate crisis (despite there being no evidence to support the hype), there is still the fact that livestock emissions are a negligible portion of supposed “greenhouse gases.” You wouldn’t be accomplishing anything to save the planet by becoming vegan.
When climate hysteria is not effective, the same groups try to frighten people away from meat using fraudulent health concerns. We have seen this lately in the meat issue as well as with natural gas appliances. Baseless health risk claims are promoted using the corporate media as an amplifier, and the evidence proving the claims wrong is never addressed.
Without regular access to meat vast numbers of people may be dependent on manufactured supplements to stay healthy. Much of these supplements are produced in countries overseas that may become hostile and cut off exports. Not to mention, governments could also control the supplies for their own citizens as leverage. The price factor for foods would make sustaining the current population untenable, leading to either mass starvation or deliberate population reduction.
Article cross-posted from Zero Hedge.
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
