Lemdro.id

1 point

4 days ago

poore-nemecek is based on misreading LCA studies. LCA as a measurement is not transferable between studies. poore-nemececk just went through and did averages. it’s not good science. it’s not even science.

report

[ - ]

oce 🐆@jlai.lu

1 point

4 days ago

Do you have a source more reputable than the Science journal and the Oxford university?

report

[ - ]

0 points

4 days ago

the papers themselves. look at their LCA references

report

[ - ]

oce 🐆@jlai.lu

2 points

4 days ago

I don’t have the current knowledge nor the time to reach the level of researchers in the domain to make my own meta analysis. Where can I read a reputable rebuttal to this meta analysis?

report

[ - ]

0 points

4 days ago

you can read the sources that poore-nemecek cite. they are explicit that their research cannot be combined with other LCAs

report

[ - ]

oce 🐆@jlai.lu

3 points

4 days ago

I am skeptical that researchers and reviewers of Science wouldn’t have accounted for that. I made some research about rebuttal to this study, so far the only ones I have found are from farmer related or anti-vegan communities, which are likely more biased than a scientific journal. I will need at least a contradictory peer reviewed article to convince me this meta analysis is incorrect.

report

[ - ]

1 point

4 days ago

if the source material can’t convince you, then live in ignorance

report