top of page

Small animal replacement problem




The small animal replacement problem is the concern that certain diet changes aimed at causing less harm to the world might, in fact, cause more harm - specifically, changes that result from eating smaller animals instead of larger ones. For example, when many people see the problems with factory farming, the first meat to go is often red meat, specifically cows. Sadly, if this person increases their chicken or fish consumption even moderately, this might be a bad move ethically. There are two main factors that drive this: welfare condition and meat generated per animal.


Welfare Condition

Welfare condition is pretty simple. Some factory farmed animals are treated worse than others. More specifically, there is a pretty clear consensus, both among animal activists and animal husbandry experts, that cows are generally given a much better life than chickens. You can see below a picture of cows in a feedlot (one of the worst stages of their life) vs the chickens (the default for almost all of their life). The conditions in the chicken situation are much worse (indoors, higher density, higher bird on bird aggression) basically across the board. You can imagine that if you had to choose to be a factory farmed chicken or a factory farmed cow you would definitely pick cow.


Size of the Animal


The second factor that plays a huge role is meat generated per animal or the size of the animal. Simply, cows are much, much larger than chickens. If you eat meat for a year you affect far more chickens than cows (even if you eat a perfectly equal weight in both). Chickens generate about 5 pounds of meat per animal, where cows generate around 750 pounds of meat. This results in the average person eating a lot more chickens than cows per year.



The results are that considerably more chickens are eaten by each person and consumed in the world as a whole. The below chart shows the very strong impact that chicken has relative to other land based animals. Broadly, the smaller the animal, the more eaten for the same number of calories, thus many more fish and chickens are eaten over cows or pigs.



What it Means

The ethical implication of all this data is that if you are reducing the amount of meat you eat, the best thing to do would be to give up chicken, fish, and eggs instead of the more traditional path of giving up red meat first, or becoming a pescetarian. It also means that animal activists should be careful about encouraging changes, such as reducing red meat, as these sorts of changes might result in more chicken and fish being consumed and more animals being harmed. Instead they should consider focusing on interventions such as corporate campaigns on behalf of smaller animals such as birds or fish.

37 Comments


bentiecesav.a.ge54.62
a day ago

https://88bet.center/ mình thấy mọi người nhắc hoài nên vào xem thử cho biết, chủ yếu soi giao diện và cách họ sắp chữ thôi chứ không định chơi. Lướt qua vài mục thấy trang làm khá sạch sẽ, nhìn hiện đại, tiêu đề và danh mục tách bạch nên đọc nhanh không bị rối. Mình để ý họ có nhắc đến phần link dự phòng phòng khi bị chặn hay lỗi, đặt ngay chỗ dễ thấy nên cũng tạo cảm giác yên tâm hơn. Nội dung chia theo từng đoạn ngắn, kéo xuống là nắm được ý chính, không bị ngợp. Tổng thể thấy họ chăm phần bố cục khá ổn.

Like

lydiaharve.y50.4.4.4
a day ago

https://ao88.social/ mình bấm vào coi thử cho biết thôi, tại thấy mọi người nhắc hoài. Vừa vào trang là thấy cách trình bày khá thoáng, kiểu chia từng khối nội dung nên đọc nhanh vẫn hiểu đang nói gì, không bị rối mắt. Có đoạn họ nhắc kho sản phẩm săn thưởng hơn 5000, nghe con số to nhưng cách viết không làm mình bị ngợp vì mỗi phần chỉ vài dòng, tiêu đề rõ ràng. Mình xem trên điện thoại thấy cuộn ổn, chữ dễ nhìn, khoảng cách dòng vừa phải nên đọc lâu cũng không mỏi. Nói chung cảm giác trang làm gọn gàng, không màu mè quá, mấy heading tách block nhìn cái là biết đang ở…

Like

bentiecesav.a.ge54.62
2 days ago

lv88 vip mình vào xem thử vì tò mò giao diện ra sao, chứ thấy mọi người bàn nhiều quá. Ấn tượng đầu là bố cục gọn gàng, màu sắc nhìn sáng và dễ chịu, các mục sắp xếp theo từng phần nên lướt một vòng là nắm được. Font chữ vừa phải, không bị rối hay dính sát nhau nên đọc lâu không mỏi mắt. Mục hướng dẫn nạp/rút trình bày khá rõ, có các lựa chọn quen thuộc như ví điện tử và chuyển khoản nên thao tác đỡ bỡ ngỡ. Dùng trên điện thoại cũng mượt, kéo trang không bị lag, tiêu đề nổi nên tìm nhanh.

Like

麦 小
麦 小
4 days ago

Really clear explanation of why “eat less red meat” can backfire if it just means “eat more chicken and fish.” The contrast between welfare conditions and the meat-per-animal numbers makes the problem very intuitive.

Articles like this are a good reminder to think in terms of total animals affected, not just calories. When I need a break from heavy topics like factory farming, I decompress with a tiny indie browser rage game I made called “Trees Hate You” – it’s just chaotic fun and runs here:https://treeshateyou.fun

Like

麦 小
麦 小
4 days ago

Really appreciate how clearly this lays out the “small animal replacement” problem. The point about welfare conditions being much worse for chickens than for cows, combined with the huge difference in meat per animal, is something I wish were highlighted more often in entry‑level “eat less meat” messaging. It’s easy to feel like you’re doing the right thing by dropping red meat, without realizing you might be increasing the total number of animals suffering.

I also like the implication for advocacy strategy: focusing on chickens and fish isn’t just about numbers, it’s about where a marginal change in diet or policy can prevent the most suffering per calorie. That’s a really useful mental model for anyone trying to align personal…

Like

Charity Entrepreneurship (CE) is a registered charity in England and Wales (Charity Number 1195850). CE supports its incubated charities through a fiscal sponsorship with Players Philanthropy Fund (Federal Tax ID: 27-6601178, ppf.org/pp), a Maryland charitable trust with federal tax-exempt status as a public charity under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.


Privacy Policy: ​You can read our Privacy Policy here
Terms of Use: You can read our Terms of Use here

Connect

  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Contact us

Please use our contact form.

bottom of page