In my youth, meat was never the star of any meal. Perhaps it was my father's parsimonious rural upbringing, but his extreme interpretation of home economics didn't suffer any budding meatmouth among his brood. A "three piece" in my house was a leg and thigh hacked into three pieces. Even the neck qualified as a piece of chicken. Oh, you don't think chicken neck is a legitimate serving? Well take a pope's nose for your insolence!
My family was middle class (when the middle class still existed) so meat wasn't so much a luxury as it was an unnecessary expense. My father was also flexible on what he considered meat fit for human consumption. Tripe was a common feature of mealtimes. For those of you unfamiliar with tripe, it's the lining of the cow's stomach cut into neat little squares. When cooked, it looked like stewed carpet. Tripe has no inherent flavour and demands that the cook be creative in its seasoning and presentation.
I didn't mind tripe as it was usually well prepared. I drew the line, though, at cow liver. We were allowed all the cow liver we could manage but I could never manage any of it.
My father probably thought to do anything less than consume an animal in its entirety would be wastage. That would explain memories of him standing over an obscenely large cow tongue with knife in hand and no clue of what to do with it.
At best, beef was a rare guest in my home. Oxtail stew would make the menu occasionally, at least until someone discovered that oxtail is actually gold and the price was adjusted accordingly.
You must be thinking I was raised in a family of scavengers but although meat was limited in our diets, we certainly didn't want for food. It was quite the opposite. We always had fresh vegetables such as christophene, string beans, bodi and provisions like cassava, kush kush, yam and dasheen, all of which were grown in our own yard. On Saturday evenings there was usually a large platter of ground provisions drizzled with olive oil (long before anyone thought to counterfeit olive oil) accompanied by a modest serving of salt fish.
The way we thought about food back then seems a world away from where we are now. The proliferation of food franchises and the availability of costly imported meats has been commensurate with the expansion of our wealth. Consequently, there are whole generations being raised on the notion that a plate without meat is somehow incongruous with modern living.
Consumers in this country, as are others around the world, are victims of a massive global industry, the sole purpose of which is to increase meat consumption ad infinitum, regardless of the costs. Indeed, this is the very premise of modern economics; untrammelled growth through insatiable consumer appetites.
There is compelling evidence of the impact of meat consumption, particularly of the red variety, on human health. Forgotten in that equation though, is the dramatic impact of food cultivation on the health of the environment.
At least one study suggests food production accounts for 70 per cent of all human water usage. Food production is also a said to be a leading cause of global deforestation. In the Amazon region in South America, cattle ranching is estimated to be responsible for 80 per cent of deforestation rates. In Amazon Brazil, nearly half a million acres of once pristine rainforest are now cattle pastures. Land also has to be cleared to grow crops like soy to feed cattle. Brazil is said to be home to approximately 200 million head of cattle. These cattle produce the greenhouse gas methane, thus contributing to global warming.
Meat consumption patterns are difficult to reverse but some governments are trying to influence these patterns in their populations in recognition of the implications for environmental health.
In the Netherlands, they recently put out new dietary guidelines which suggest that meat consumption should be limited to two servings per week, with no more than 60 per cent of that being red meat. This is being communicated to the public not simply as a health advisory but imperatives for environmental conservation.
The UK is also getting on board through Public Health England with publicised nutrition advice recommending a diet lower in red and processed meats, one favouring more beans and peas.
It will be interesting to see how the United States, the country which created Turducken (a chicken, stuffed inside a duck, stuffed inside a turkey, stuffed inside a human) will interpret research which leans towards a world with less meat consumption.
Here at home, it would be useful to revisit the days when meat didn't take centre stage at the dinner table. No one is suggesting that anyone go full vegan, that's a personal choice. Less meat though, would reduce our contribution to carbon emissions, save money, reduce foreign exchange expenditure and likely allow us to lead healthier lives.
For the sake of the planet's future, the sacrifice is certainly worth it.