Activists warn of 'chilling effect' of EPA's deletion of tweet on eating less red meat

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had tweeted advice on cutting down on red meat 'slowly' by trying more vegetarian options and being more 'adventurous'. 

The deletion by the environmental watchdog of a tweet advising people to cut down on red meat after farming organisation complaints, could have a "disastrous chilling effect" on emissions and consumption reduction targets, activists have warned.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had tweeted advice on cutting down on red meat "slowly" by trying more vegetarian options and being more "adventurous". 

It was accompanied by a picture of  Sex and the City actor Kim Cattrall suggesting playfully that doing so would make someone "healthier, wealthier, and more fabulous".

Following complaints by organisations such as the Irish Farmers' Association (IFA) and the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association (ICSA), the EPA removed the tweet because it was not intended to cause anger or "confusion".

The EPA said: "For agriculture to be environmentally-sustainable requires a sector that produces food with a low environmental footprint and can validate this effectively. 

"In this context, to reduce this complex debate to a single tweet would diminish the seriousness of the discussion we need to have. 

"For that reason, we believed it better to remove the tweet, and allow more considered debate of the issue to happen in a more appropriate forum."

However, environmental activists criticised the removal of the tweet as bowing to pressure from a powerful lobbying group.

Friends of the Earth chief executive, Oisín Coghlan, said: "The EPA has a range of functions related to the environment but also behaviour change.

"The tweet was absolutely factual. If you eat less meat, you pollute less and if you eat too much in your overall diet, it's healthy to cut down. 

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

"If it is running scared around information around dietary choices, is it also going to stop telling people to retrofit or move to an electric vehicle or fly less?

"This could have a disastrous chilling effect. The State and State agencies have the right to tell us how we can reduce pollution, emissions, and promote health. The EPA needs to stand up for basic science, especially with the scale of the challenges we face."

The ICSA stood by its claim that the EPA is on a "blatant anti-meat crusade".

"It is well accepted that ultra-processed foods with lots of added salts, sugars, chemicals, and the proliferation of junk food in every filling station is far more of a health issue than consuming meat as part of a healthy balanced diet. 

"For the EPA to try and frame meat as unhealthy with no context is something we have come to expect from vegan advocates, but it is not appropriate from the EPA.

"As if all that wasn’t enough, the EPA then moved into the realms of tabloid clickbait when it suggested you would be “more fabulous” like a Sex and the City star who earns $350,000 per episode and is worth an estimated $60m. 

The ICSA stood by its claim that the EPA is on a "blatant anti-meat crusade".

"The notion that eating less meat will make the average person more like Kim Cattrall is risible and again, it exhibits poor judgment from the EPA and again betrays a sense that there is an anti-meat agenda," the ISCA said.

Media and Tourism Minister Catherine Martin said the EPA is not telling people to stop but rather cut down on meat consumption.

"Producing a kilo of meat, the resources that go into that, the emissions from it is much more than producing a kilo of grain. 

"No one is telling people to stop eating meat altogether but there are absolute real benefits to reducing it. 

"I think maybe the EPA felt it needed to sit down with the farming organisations and explain the rationale for it but it’s not for me to tell the EPA what to do."