Trending
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) published a paper in December 2023 that estimates that our food system, which we know to be primarily based on animal proteins, externalizes $12.7 trillion in costs to society for us to carry. That is an estimated 10% of global GDP. In other words, in producing food, the food system, primarily made up of large corporations and not small farmers (17% of the U.S. production value), also produces a burden on society for which it does not pay and it transfers that cost to the members of society.
The above-mentioned paper determined that 73% of the $12.7 trillion cost to society is due to dietary pattern-induced productivity losses. This is in-line with a 2018 Milken Institute report stating that the $1.1 trillion in U.S. health care costs for chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and obesity, as determined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), is actually $3.7 trillion when lost economic productivity is included. “This is equivalent to nearly 20 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP).”
So our diets aren’t just having a major impact on our health. They are also impacting the global economy.
Another societal concern with significant cost to society has emerged from our diets: antimicrobial resistance (AMR). AMR is a “growing global concern, caused by the overuse and misuse of antibiotics and other antimicrobials in humans, animals, and agriculture. AMR occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites change over time and no longer respond to medicines, making infections harder [or impossible] to treat and increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, and death,” notes the CDC.
Per the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC, [AMR] is an urgent global public health threat, killing at least 1.27 million people worldwide and associated with nearly 5 million deaths in 2019. In the U.S., more than 2.8 million antimicrobial-resistant infections occur each year. More than 35,000 people die as a result.
The WHO, CDC and other agencies have called this an increasingly serious threat to global public health that requires action across all government sectors and society.
Amazingly, the biggest use of all antibiotics on the market is the livestock industry for the production of meat and dairy. "Of all antibiotics sold in the United States, approximately 80% are sold for use in animal agriculture; about 70% of these are ‘medically important’ (i.e., from classes important to human medicine)," notes the National Library of Medicine.
It goes on to say that, "Antibiotics are administered to animals in feed to marginally improve growth rates and to prevent infections, a practice projected to increase dramatically worldwide over the next 15 years. There is growing evidence that antibiotic resistance in humans is promoted by the widespread use of non-therapeutic antibiotics in animals. Resistant bacteria are transmitted to humans through direct contact with animals, by exposure to animal manure, through consumption of undercooked meat, and through contact with uncooked meat or surfaces meat has touched."
These factors, among others, have led to a situation in which antimicrobial resistance is rising at an alarming rate, threatening our ability to treat common infectious diseases, resulting in prolonged illness, higher medical costs, and increased mortality. Some experts note that we are headed towards a 70% antibiotic inefficacy rate. "One in six laboratory-confirmed bacterial infections causing common infections in people worldwide in 2023 were resistant to antibiotic treatments, according to a new World Health Organization (WHO). Between 2018 and 2023, antibiotic resistance rose in over 40% of the monitored antibiotics with an average annual increase of 5%-15%."
The cost of antibiotic resistance to society, particularly in the U.S., is substantial, with a financial burden of more than $4.6 billion per the CDC. More than the cost is the concern that standard hospital procedures such as childbirth and surgeries will be compromised by non-functioning antibiotics, primarily due to the over exposure of the same through the livestock industry that creates the meat and dairy we eat.
So where do this leave us?
Trivia: By bypassing the courts, what insertion into the Farm Bill is trying to negate the twice upheld in court Prop 12 law that acts as a safety measure for meat eaters and an upgrade in animal welfare standards?
1. Upgrade our current situation. Denmark, Europe’s second-largest pork producer, slashed antibiotic use by increasing the amount of barn space allotted to individual hogs and improving ventilation in the facilities. In much the same way, U.S. livestock farmers could also lower antibiotic use by raising fewer animals in better-ventilated barns or having animals spend more time on pasture instead of in confinements," puts forth the Environmental Working Group (EWG.)
However, as many may know, California Prop 12, the law to increase the size of pig gestation crates to avoid ‘disease inducing’ conditions, is now threatened. After defeating several challenges and being upheld in the U.S. Supreme Court, it is being targeted by industry interests trying to insert the deeply misleadingly named ‘Save Our Bacon’ Act into the Farm Bill. The latter would nullify the tenets of Prop 12 for inter-state business and, in brief, overturn the will of the people and the Supreme Court.
This is a perfect example of externalizing costs. Corporate animal factories don’t want to spend on upgrades for societal safety precautions for meat eaters, so they push the cost onto the citizens who pay with increased healthcare costs, prolonged sickness and, in some cases, death.
So much for upgrading our situation.
The lack of foresight and strategy regarding the food system and its societal implications is impressive. The lack of foresight and strategy so that a small group of industry members can benefit at the large-scale demise of society is, well, insanity.
2. Diversify our protein supply chain. Another option for fewer antibiotics in our food, in addition to better conditions to prevent disease in factories such that every animal isn’t butt to snout in their own feces, is having a diversified approach to protein.
Diversifying the protein supply chain to include protein products from beans, whole grains, nuts, seeds, legumes and pulses, in addition to regular factory or grass-fed animals, is one way to lessen the pressure on the system, as these foods don’t require massive antibiotic infusions.
Further, innovations in fermented proteins from mycelium and microbes, using the age-old ‘technology’ that we use for yeast, tea, beer, kimchi, kombucha and more, can make proteins at scale, without using large swaths of land or inordinate amounts of water, both of which are downfalls of the current way of producing animal protein.
It’s not rocket science. As a society we can’t risk having our antibiotics fail. We also can’t risk a small group of industry titans (and the politicians taking their money) choking the system so that progress can’t be made.
3. Innovate for the future. It’s impossible to have a future of food if there is no investment for a future of food. Novel innovations to improve efficiency, taste, human wellness, and animal conditions can render the food supply safer.
In short, we need a food system that can create more food, that is more nutritious, in a shorter amount of time while using fewer resources and creating less damage.
However, despite the system being on the brink of its own demise, there seems to be no roadmap for feeding 10 billion people by 2050 without destroying ourselves in the process.
According to the ClimateShot Investor Coalition (CLIC) and as noted by the Climate Policy Initiative, "…agrifood systems receive 7.2% of global climate finance, just short of USD $95 billion annually. This is merely 8.3% of the USD $1.1 trillion in climate funding required annually by 2030 to reduce the sector’s impact on deforestation, emissions, and biodiversity loss, and to adapt to rapid environmental changes that impact global food security, production, and supply chains."
Image from Climate Policy Initiative
It’s baffling to me that something as important as feeding people safely is currently being relegated as an afterthought at best in the policy and investing worlds. And when people can’t get enough food or the system makes them sick, there is trouble. This is why my next article will be, The Next War Will Be Fought Over Food and Water.
Trivia: By bypassing the courts, what insertion into the Farm Bill is trying to negate the twice upheld in court Prop 12 law that acts as a safety measure for meat eaters and an upgrade in animal welfare standards?
The cutely named and deeply misleading, ‘Save Our Bacon’ Act.
California Proposition 12 ("Prop 12") is a farm-animal welfare law with major safety implications for meat eaters that was approved by California voters in November 2018. It requires minimum space standards for egg-laying hens, breeding pigs (sows), and veal calves, and prohibits the sale in California of certain pork, egg, and veal products that do not meet those standards, even if the animals were raised outside California. These standards can cut down on the passage of disease, as well as act as humane measures.
Prop 12 passed with about 63% of the vote. It was challenged by the National Pork Producers Council and, in 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court, in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, upheld Prop 12 and rejected the industry's constitutional challenge.
Apparently, the will of the voting people and the judgement of the Supreme Court aren’t that important. The ‘Save Our Bacon’ Act was sandwiched into the 2026 Farm Bill by industry leaders. The Farm Bill passed the House. The Senate has yet to vote.
Related: Race for Food Security Could Define Global Power in Coming Decades