Regarding the letter from reader David Basener (“Planets and protein,” Voice, Jan. 3) that compared animal and plant utility in producing protein:
Although I agree with him that the conversion of plant food to meat in an animal is not 100 percent efficient, it should also be realized that conversion of vegetable protein to food usable for human beings is not 100 percent efficient either.
A plant is a living entity, just as an animal is, and a certain amount of water, labor and nutrients are required to keep the plant alive, just as is the case with animals. And if you grow tomatoes, for example, you eat the tomatoes, but the rest of the plant is not useful to you.
The same is true of other plants one might think of, whether they are used for animal or human food. It is also true that meat for food is not the only useful product of the animal. The bones, hooves and hides also provide valuable products.
I, like Mr. Basener, do not have research figures on the conversion rate of protein for human use of animals versus plants, but having grown up on a farm, I know that animals can convert plants to protein a lot more efficiently than I can. I would have a terrible time living with a bale of hay for food. But I can eat the cow after she has done the job for me.
If one is a vegetarian, it doesn’t seem to me that these arguments matter much anyhow. All the vegetarians I know are so for a multiplicity of reasons that have very little to do with animals versus plant protein conversion rates.
