Vit IELTS

Should we stop eating meat?
Some claim that it’s the only way to save our planet from disaster. But is it really that simple?
A      The call for people to eat less meat to save the planet is growing louder, so if less is good, wouldn’t none be better? To find out, let’s imagine what would happen if the world eliminated meat, milk and eggs from its diet, then trace the effects. Last year the world consumed 289 million tonnes of meat, 700 million tonnes of milk and 1.2 billion eggs. Environmentally speaking, this came at an enormous cost.
B      All agriculture damages the environment. Take for example the felled forests and the common use of irrigation systems. And it may surprise you to know that agriculture creates more greenhouse gases than all methods of transport put together. Livestock farming does the most damage. In part, that is because most livestock eat grain that could be used to feed human populations, and farmers are forced to grow more than we would otherwise need to meet the demand. Altogether, if we switched to a vegan diet, meaning no meat, dairy or eggs, the land currently required for crops would drop by an estimated 21 per cent, about 3.4 million hectares, roughly the size of India.
C      One environmental impact that would also lessen through a reduction in animal farming would be that of the nitrogen emitted from agricultural processes, which spreads into both waterways and land. According to environmental scientist Allison Leach, if everyone eliminated dairy products and eggs, this kind of pollution would fall by 60%. Livestock production has another serious environmental impact. Global statistics are hard to come by, but in the US at least, livestock account for 55% of erosion, mostly from forests being cut down to make way for grazing land. On top of this, half of all antibiotics manufacture are fed to livestock as part of their normal diet, a practice that is leading to drug-resistant bacteria.
D      A meat-free world, then would be greener in many ways. However, if everyone opted to give up meat there would be significant costs too. For most of human history, livestock grazed on land that wasn’t suitable for ploughing, and in doing so they converted inedible grass into edible meat and milk. Even today, a flock of sheep or goats can be the most efficient way to get food from marginal land. In a world in which over a billion people do not have enough to eat, using this land for crop production would contribute to food insecurity.
E      In some parts of the world today, livestock like chickens, for instance, can subsist on leftovers and whatever they find. Tara Garnett, who heads the Food Climate Research Network at the University of Surrey, points out the usefulness of these animals. By giving them your leftovers, she says, they deal with your rubbish, and you get meat. Garnett admits, though, that if this kind of approach were generally adopted, it would require a major adjustment in food preferences; people would have to get used to chicken, for example, with less fat.
F      Another downside to a meat-free world would be the disappearance of animals by products. Such a world would have to replace the 11 million tonnes of leather and 2 million tonnes of wool that come annually from livestock farming and which are turned into clothing. Furthermore, even ardent vegetarians acknowledge that dairy products and meat may be a good thing in poorer countries. ‘Whilst there’s no doubt that considerable reduction of meat consumption would have an environmental benefit, we do have to be careful about saying it would be the best solution if the whole world went vegetarian,’ says Annette Pinner, chief executive of the UK Vegetarian Society. For many of the world’s poorest rural residents, an animal may represent their only realistic hope for a little extra income, and a little animal protein can make a big difference to a marginal diet.
G      What if we decided on a no-meat vegetarian diet, rather than a vegan diet? After all, milk and eggs are very efficient ways of producing animal calories. ‘It’s difficult to switch to no-meat but milk diet,’ says Helmut Haberl, a social ecologist. ‘Dairy cows must calve every year to keep producing milk, and only half their offspring will be female. While many vegetarians see moral reasons not to kill and eat the males, there is surely no practical reason to waste so much meat.’ Similar arguments apply to chickens kept for eggs.
H      So even though a meat-free world sounds good on paper, it is likely that a utopian future will still have some animal products in it. The real questions, then, are how much meat do we want, and how will we produce it? The answers depend on how you approach to questions. The most straightforward approach is to assume that the world will continue to want evermore meat. The United Nations’ best guess is that by 2050, the world will need to more than double its production of meat, an increase that would be environmentally disastrous.
I      Under this scenario the goal will have to be producing the most meat at the lowest environmental cost. According to Walter Falcon, an agricultural economist, this means fewer free range cattle and sheep in green fields. ‘If you’re going to keep some livestock systems, I think the ones you’ll want to keep are the intensive ones,’ he says. Of course this does not take into account animal welfare issues, as intensive farming usually means poor living conditions and the use of growth hormones.

14. The suggestion that people may need to adapt to a different quality of meat
<ul data-path-to-node="4">
<li>
Đáp án: E
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: (Cuối đoạn E) “…it would require a major adjustment in food preferences; people would have to get used to chicken, for example, with less fat.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Đoạn E đề cập rằng nếu chúng ta nuôi gia súc bằng thức ăn thừa, con người sẽ phải điều chỉnh sở thích ăn uống (adjustment in food preferences), cụ thể là phải làm quen với loại thịt có chất lượng khác (ví dụ: thịt gà ít mỡ hơn).
</li>
</ul>
15. A description of the way animals were fed in the past
<ul data-path-to-node="6">
<li>
Đáp án: D
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: (Đoạn D) “For most of human history, livestock grazed on land that wasn’t suitable for ploughing, and in doing so they converted inedible grass into edible meat and milk.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Cụm từ “For most of human history” chỉ về quá khứ (in the past). Đoạn văn mô tả cách chăn nuôi truyền thống là cho gia súc gặm cỏ trên những vùng đất không thể trồng trọt.
</li>
</ul>
16. A prediction in regard to human demand for meat
<ul data-path-to-node="8">
<li>
Đáp án: H
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: (Đoạn H) “The United Nations’ best guess is that by 2050, the world will need to more than double its production of meat…”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Đây là một dự đoán (prediction) về tương lai (năm 2050), khẳng định rằng nhu cầu và sản lượng thịt của con người sẽ tăng gấp đôi.
</li>
</ul>
17. The potential consequences of a meat-free world
<ul data-path-to-node="10">
<li>
Đáp án: F
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: (Đoạn F) “Another downside to a meat-free world would be the disappearance of animal by-products… replace the 11 million tonnes of leather and 2 million tonnes of wool…”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Đoạn F thảo luận về các hệ quả tiềm tàng (potential consequences) nếu thế giới không ăn thịt, bao gồm sự biến mất của các phụ phẩm như da và len, cũng như tác động tiêu cực đến thu nhập của người nghèo.
</li>
</ul>

Questions 14–17

18. …including the frequent use of {irrigation} in modern farming…
<ul data-path-to-node="4">
<li>
Đáp án: irrigation
</li>
<li>
Vị trí: Đoạn B (Dòng 1-2)
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: “Take for example the felled forests and the common use of irrigation systems.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Bài đọc nêu hai ví dụ về tác hại của nông nghiệp: phá rừng và việc sử dụng phổ biến các hệ thống tưới tiêu (irrigation). Từ “frequent use” trong tóm tắt đồng nghĩa với “common use” trong bài.
</li>
</ul>
19. It is also responsible for the production of many greenhouse gases, more so than {transport} is.
<ul data-path-to-node="6">
<li>
Đáp án: transport
</li>
<li>
Vị trí: Đoạn B (Dòng 3-4)
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: “…agriculture creates more greenhouse gases than all methods of transport put together.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Tác giả so sánh lượng khí thải nhà kính từ nông nghiệp với tất cả các phương thức giao thông vận tải (transport), và khẳng định nông nghiệp gây ra nhiều khí thải hơn.
</li>
</ul>
20. A meat-free diet would mean that actually less {land} could be used for crops.
<ul data-path-to-node="8">
<li>
Đáp án: land
</li>
<li>
Vị trí: Đoạn B (2 dòng cuối)
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: “…if we switched to a vegan diet… the land currently required for crops would drop by an estimated 21 per cent…”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Nếu thế giới ngừng ăn thịt, diện tích đất (land) cần thiết để trồng trọt sẽ giảm đi đáng kể (khoảng 21%) vì không còn phải trồng ngũ cốc để nuôi gia súc.
</li>
</ul>
21. Far less chemical pollution, specifically in the form of {nitrogen} would also be released…
<ul data-path-to-node="10">
<li>
Đáp án: nitrogen
</li>
<li>
Vị trí: Đoạn C (Dòng 1-2)
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: “One environmental impact… would be that of the nitrogen emitted from agricultural processes, which spreads into both waterways and land.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Bài đọc đề cập đến một loại ô nhiễm hóa học cụ thể là khí nitơ (nitrogen) phát thải từ các quá trình nông nghiệp. Lượng ô nhiễm này sẽ giảm đi nếu giảm chăn nuôi.
</li>
</ul>
22. In the US, there is clear evidence that considerable {erosion} is caused by the demand for grazing land…
<ul data-path-to-node="12">
<li>
Đáp án: erosion
</li>
<li>
Vị trí: Đoạn C (Dòng 5-6)
</li>
<li>
Dẫn chứng: “…in the US at least, livestock account for 55% of erosion, mostly from forests being cut down to make way for grazing land.”
</li>
<li>
Giải thích: Tại Mỹ, việc chăn nuôi gia súc chiếm tới 55% nguyên nhân gây ra sự xói mòn (erosion), chủ yếu do việc phá rừng để lấy đất chăn thả.
</li>
</ul>

Questions 18–22

<h3 data-path-to-node="4">23. It is not possible to say that a vegetarian diet is right for everyone.</h3>
<ul data-path-to-node="5">
<li>Đáp án: C (Annette Pinner)</li>
<li>Vị trí: Đoạn F (Dòng 4-6).</li>
<li>Dẫn chứng: “…we do have to be careful about saying it would be the best solution if the whole world went vegetarian,’ says Annette Pinner…”</li>
<li>Giải thích: Annette Pinner (Giám đốc điều hành Hiệp hội Ăn chay Anh) khuyên nên thận trọng khi khẳng định ăn chay là giải pháp tốt nhất cho tất cả mọi người, vì động vật rất quan trọng đối với thu nhập và dinh dưỡng của người nghèo.</li>
</ul>
<h3 data-path-to-node="6">24. It may be economically preferable to farm animals in limited space.</h3>
<ul data-path-to-node="7">
<li>Đáp án: E (Walter Falcon)</li>
<li>Vị trí: Đoạn I (Dòng 2-4).</li>
<li>Dẫn chứng: “‘If you’re going to keep some livestock systems, I think the ones you’ll want to keep are the intensive ones,’ he [Walter Falcon] says.”</li>
<li>Giải thích: Chăn nuôi thâm canh (intensive farming) chính là hình thức nuôi gia súc trong không gian hạn chế (limited space) để tối ưu hóa năng suất. Walter Falcon cho rằng đây là hệ thống nên được duy trì để có chi phí môi trường thấp nhất.</li>
</ul>
<h3 data-path-to-node="8">25. It does not make sense to give up meat without giving up dairy products too.</h3>
<ul data-path-to-node="9">
<li>Đáp án: D (Helmut Haberl)</li>
<li>Vị trí: Đoạn G (Dòng 3-6).</li>
<li>Dẫn chứng: “Dairy cows must calve every year to keep producing milk… while many vegetarians see moral reasons not to kill and eat the males, there is surely no practical reason to waste so much meat.”</li>
<li>Giải thích: Helmut Haberl lập luận rằng nếu vẫn dùng sữa (dairy) thì vẫn sẽ có những con bê đực được sinh ra. Nếu không ăn thịt chúng thì sẽ rất lãng phí. Do đó, việc bỏ thịt mà vẫn giữ sữa là không thực tế (no practical reason).</li>
</ul>
<h3 data-path-to-node="10">26. Some animals can be fed in a way that allows waste to be recycled.</h3>
<ul data-path-to-node="11">
<li>Đáp án: B (Tara Garnett)</li>
<li>Vị trí: Đoạn E (Dòng 3-5).</li>
<li>Dẫn chứng: “Tara Garnett… points out the usefulness of these animals. By giving them your leftovers, she says, they deal with your rubbish, and you get meat.”</li>
<li>Giải thích: Tara Garnett giải thích rằng việc cho động vật ăn thức ăn thừa (leftovers) chính là một cách để xử lý rác thải (deal with rubbish/waste), giúp “tái chế” rác thành thực phẩm (thịt).</li>
</ul>

[COM] Should we stop eating meat?

What to expect

Test format

Before you begin

Your attempt history

Ready to test yourself?

Other reading tests

[COM] A Brief History of Humans and Food

[COM] The History of Chocolate

[COM] Fishbourne Roman Palace