About this transcript: This is a full AI-generated transcript of Takeout - The Environmental Dangers of Fast-Food Consumption - FULL DOCUMENTARY - Vegan from Gravitas Documentaries, published June 5, 2026. The transcript contains 13,672 words with timestamps and was generated using Whisper AI.
"I'll see you next time. The Amazon jungle, the largest tropical rainforest in the world, is burning. The forest contains 10% of the planet's biodiversity and plays a crucial role in global climate stability. Over 20% of the forest has already been lost, and projections show that at this rate, there"
[00:00:00] Speaker ?: I'll see you next time.
[00:00:30] Speaker 1: The Amazon jungle, the largest tropical rainforest in the world, is burning. The forest contains 10% of the planet's biodiversity and plays a crucial role in global climate stability. Over 20% of the forest has already been lost, and projections show that at this rate, there won't be much left by the turn of the century. In 2019, the Amazon experienced a devastating and unprecedented fire season, with over 40,000 reported fires and 3,500 square miles of forest lost. It's estimated that an area the size of a soccer field and a half is lost every minute. Our team, led by award-winning filmmaker Michal Siewierski, decided to embark on an investigative journey to uncover the real reasons behind the catastrophic destruction of the Amazon forest.
[00:01:27] Speaker 2: We're already seeing consequences of deforestation and climate change. In South America, there are almost double the rate of fires that there were historically.
[00:01:50] Speaker 3: You know, everybody's aware that there is environmental damage happening. People know that the Amazon is being lost. But I don't think that most people really connect it to what's on their fork at a particular moment. And that's what's got to happen. People have to realize we've got a choice. We can choose to save the Amazon, or we can choose to lose it forever. The choice is right here, on our planet.
[00:02:12] Speaker 4: Many people don't understand that when they eat meat in Los Angeles, California, or New York, that meat could have been the result of deforestation in Brazil.
[00:02:23] Speaker 5: Stop anyone on the street and ask them, why are the rainforests being cut down? Some of the slightly more aware people might say palm oil. But most people would say, like, oh, because it's wood for houses. And they would have no idea that there's a connection between animal agriculture and deforestation.
[00:02:42] Speaker 6: And it's all wrapped up in that burger. And for them to sell it as $2.95, it's a bargain. That's our future. That's the rainforest. That's our soils. That's the air. That's where your children are going to be growing their food in the future. That's really what we're eating.
[00:02:57] Speaker 7: The connection from the destruction of the rainforest to grow soy, to feed animals, to your burger on the table or your steak on the table, it's not easy to track.
[00:03:07] Speaker 2: When we talk about soy, people should be clear, we are not talking about tofu. We're talking about a crop that is grown primarily for animal feed. About 70% of soy is grown for animal feed as well as other non-direct food uses like biodiesel. When we say soy, we really are talking about meat.
[00:03:27] Speaker 7: So the soy that is grown in the Amazon primarily goes to the European and American markets. They ship the soy overseas, put them in these giant machines called crushers, and turn them into feed for livestock, and then that's used to produce beef to feed people.
[00:03:43] Speaker 2: And that's what we buy when, you know, you go to fast food chains. You're basically, in some ways, eating soy that was grown in the Amazon or other parts of South America.
[00:03:55] Speaker 1: Fire has been used by people for thousands of years as a way to clear large forested areas. But why, in this day and age, are modern farmers still using this devastating and unsustainable practice?
[00:04:09] Speaker 7: People are burning the forest to plant soy because it's the easiest way to do it. You can go into an area that has been undeveloped, cut it down, burn it, grow soy, and sell it to companies. Large international corporations will give you the funds to do it. So when a forest in the Amazon is cut and burned, it puts a lot of nutrients into the soil. Once the forest is burned down, you can grow soy in it, you might be able to get a crop or two, but eventually it's just going to dry out. Tropical rainforests aren't made to continuously grow crops in that way. They generally will burn the forest, grow something, and then move on. When you have an entire economic system that is based on destroying the rainforest and selling it to consumers, it's going to take some real agitation in order to change that.
[00:04:55] Speaker 1: Global warming is a controversial topic, but many scientists believe that deforestation plays an important role in the process. Fewer forests means more greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere, which in turn increases the severity of climate change.
[00:05:12] Speaker 7: In the Amazon in particular, and other rainforests as well, once you cut down the existing vegetation, it's not going to grow back into a rainforest. It's going to turn into a much drier type of ecosystem, a non-native ecosystem, and that's going to be extremely prone to fire, as well as the fact that all of that carbon that had previously been stored in that forest has now been released into the atmosphere.
[00:05:37] Speaker 5: It seems like climate change, people are slowly starting to take it seriously. And one of the ways to fight climate change is through carbon sequestration. Oceans and the rainforests are the best places for carbon sequestration.
[00:05:50] Speaker 7: So rather than the tropical rainforest serving as a carbon sink that keeps carbon out of the atmosphere and helps mitigate against global warming, when you cut it down and burn it, you're sending all of that carbon out and you're causing a major emission of greenhouse gases in a system that should be trapping greenhouse gases.
[00:06:10] Speaker 8: And that has to do also with the amount of emissions that the cattle produce, mainly in the amount of methane. What we have noticed with the deforestation, there is actually a change in the soil microbial community that also produce methane or consume methane. And what we found is that actually, especially the methane consumers, these are bacteria that use methane as their source of carbon. They are actually significantly reduced in the soil. And so suggesting there's going to be less methane uptake once the deforestation has happened, we actually can significantly reduce our overall emissions by eating less meat or eating no meat whatsoever.
[00:06:51] Speaker 9: If you look at the emissions of gas emissions in Brazil, agropecuária responds directly or indirectly to 73% of the gross emissions of gas emissions in Brazil.
[00:07:04] Speaker 2: Meat is responsible for more climate pollution than all the cars, ships, trucks and planes in the world combined. This is a really big issue, and it doesn't get enough attention. Deforestation alone accounts for something around 15% of total global warming pollution, and yet it gets just 2% of the funding to address the climate crisis.
[00:07:25] Speaker 5: I was flying from Argentina to New York, and we were flying over the rainforest, and it was the middle of the night, and I looked at a map, you know, the little sky map, and we were flying over the jungle. And I looked out the window, and there were just lights everywhere, and I was trying to figure out what city we were flying over. I was like, are we flying over Brasilia? Because there was like lights to the horizon. And I realized they weren't city lights, they were fires. And it was everywhere I looked, there were fires, just burning, and burning, and burning, but in lines, so it was all deforestation. And just the immensity of that struck me.
[00:08:01] Speaker 1: Deforestation also affects the over 2 million people that live in and depend on the forest for food and shelter. To this day, indigenous populations in Brazil and other countries in South America are still being kicked out of their lands, even though these are public areas under federal jurisdiction and protected by law. In 2018, 135 Indians were murdered in Brazil, and there have been over a thousand registered cases of violence, abuse, death threats, and rape of indigenous people. The genocide of Indians in Brazil started 500 years ago, when the country was first colonized, and it still occurs to this day.
[00:08:50] Speaker 10: There are several references of people in the Amazônia that live in voluntary isolation, which are the people, sometimes called people invisible or isolated people. But they are isolated because they don't want the contact, they know the existence of the black, but they are resisting. In those 500 years, they are resistant to contact, they don't want them. They want to live the way they are living. They want their lands there, from the browns, otherwise they would have been looking for contact. And they suffer extreme danger, with the invasion of lands, with the agronegócio, with the occupation of the land, of the Amazônia. So, these peoples are the most dangerous people, not just as their language and culture, but as human beings. And my experience of travel, from Santarém to Santarém to there, is to see that the impressive advance that already has been around the land of India, when 20 and so many years ago, when I started to go from the Monomotor, it was green to the area of Zoé. Now, it is very close to the land of India. And the Zoé are poor people of recent contact. They were contacted in the 1980s. If they disappear, if there is something against them, we will not have any news.
[00:10:41] Speaker 11: They are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world. They are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world. They are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world. They are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world.
[00:11:00] Speaker ?: They are poor people of the world, they are poor people of the world.
[00:11:04] Speaker 7: So, there has been very strong laws in Brazil of late for the protection of indigenous territory that's been identified as being the traditional territory and the occupied territory of indigenous people. There's a great fear that, as of the most recent election, the president of Brazil has pledged that he's going to remove that protection.
[00:11:27] Speaker 2: One of the crazier things we heard from President Bolsonaro was that he said he wished that the Brazilian cavalry had been as effective as the American cavalry and eliminated more native populations. The attitude is we want to get native peoples off the land so we can bring in cattle and soy, which is what progress is. I mean, to me, I don't see progress as converting an ancient ecosystem that provides life to the whole planet to a monoculture that just serves big businesses as a positive or as a sign of civilization. To the contrary, I mean, this is an abuse that we don't need.
[00:12:02] Speaker 1: Rainforests provide habitat to over 80% of plants and animals living on land, but deforestation destroys their habitats and diminishes biodiversity. Scientists estimate that 4,000 to 6,000 species go extinct every year due to deforestation alone.
[00:12:22] Speaker 9: The impact of the destruction of the Amazon forest reverberates beyond the borders of the Amazon forest. It affects your life, my life, our children's lives, the lives of people who are far from this country.
[00:12:37] Speaker 5: The rainforests are largely what make this earth habitable for us.
[00:12:42] Speaker 7: Rainforests are one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems in the world, which means that there's a lot of animals that live there and only there and very unique places. And, you know, that's where they live and they can't live anywhere else. And when you cut the forest down, the animals are gone. They've got nowhere to go.
[00:12:59] Speaker 5: This might sound sort of like a hippie would say this, but it's actual science. And what we're saying is that our earth is a system, and nothing exists in isolation. All life relies on other life, and it relies on the sustainability and health of other ecosystems. And as humans, we have this pride and this stupidity that makes us think that we can destroy part of the world and not affect us. And what we're realizing now is that that's not the case. When you destroy the rainforest, you're destroying yourself.
[00:13:30] Speaker 12: The Amazon rainforest is considered by many to be the largest natural pharmacy in the world. It's home to an abundance of plants renowned for their medical properties, and it's estimated that 25% of all the drugs used today are derived from rainforest plants.
[00:13:46] Speaker 1: The protection of these natural elements is fundamental to maintaining this incredible hotspot of biodiversity.
[00:14:07] Speaker 13: "The medicines used today for human health and animals have an origin, especially in plants, from parasitosis, to cancer, to cancer, to cancer, to cardiovascular disease. All of them have a very important involvement with molecules that were found in the most different plants that exist. And not only plants, but also in fungi. We have to talk about antibiotics that were discovered in fungi. And the impact that the antibiotics have on human health and animal is incalculable. And the majority of the organisms, the living organisms, the Amazon, is not known yet. So, when we destroy a fungi, a bacteria, a species of plant, we don't have any idea of what we can lose. What we need to do in the world is to fight for the preservation of the environment. And the other hand, to research it, to know it. "The animals have a huge diversity in the world. They have a huge diversity in the world. They have a very sophisticated immune system. They defend themselves against infections. And we've learned a lot by studying the defense of infections from insects. Imagine what we have to discover in the future." "Knowing this environment is important for several reasons. First, because it's a way to preserve it. Because when we know something, it becomes easier to justify that it has to exist. It's a race against the time, because it's easy to do, it's easy to do. It's just putting fire. The agronegócio is very powerful. Everything that is produced in the Amazonas is sold with very facilitation for the whole world. So, it's necessary to work not only to preserve and avoid desmatting, but also to know the biodiversity of the Amazonas. This is urgent. We are very late.
[00:15:51] Speaker 1: It's recognized that the production of meat plays a key role in deforestation and climate change. But in recent years, meat consumption has also been linked to numerous chronic diseases. In 2014, the World Health Organization classified processed meat as a Group 1 carcinogen, the same category given to cigarettes. Red meat was assigned to Group 2A. When it comes to cancer risk, the same group as the pesticide DDT.
[00:16:31] Speaker 6: "As a physician, I think one of the best things people can do for their health is reduce their consumption of meat or eliminate it altogether. The scientific evidence is becoming overwhelming that the more animal muscle that we consume, the higher our risk of clogged arteries and colon cancer and a host of other diseases. So, no, I think the less meat we eat, the healthier we're going to be."
[00:16:54] Speaker 14: O brasileiro come carne demais. A gente tem alguns estudos que mostram que a média de consumo de carne do brasileiro é de mais ou menos 250, 255 gramas de carne por dia. Então, é um consumo realmente bem excessivo. O que ocorre é que a proteína animal, ela traz junto gordura saturada. Só para a gente ter uma ideia numérica, quando você come uma carne vermelha, em média, das calorias dessa carne, 50% são proteína, 50% dela são de gordura. Então, a gente cria toda uma trama de consequências que elevam as principais doenças crônicas do mundo.
[00:17:25] Speaker 3: "Not only is meat consumption linked to heart disease and to stroke, but it's also linked to many of the most common forms of cancer. Probably the big standout is colorectal cancer, which is a huge killer in the United States and in many other countries. It's the meat itself, but it's also the meat cooking processes. As meat is heated up in the oven, carcinogens form on the meat. There's a link between meat and Alzheimer's disease that came as a huge surprise. Starting in 1993, researchers in Chicago tracked what people were eating and they tracked who developed Alzheimer's disease and who didn't. And one of the first things they discovered was that the fat that is predominant in meat, saturated fat, could triple your risk getting Alzheimer's disease. Now, the good news is, if you're not eating it, then your risk was cut hugely.
[00:18:15] Speaker 14: A gente já tá numa situação hoje que é inevitável o impacto que a gente tá criando, né, no sentido de mudanças climáticas pro nosso planeta. E nós como prescritores, por mais que o nosso olhar inicial seja o paciente e as suas necessidades, eu tenho que associar também, junto dessas necessidades, o que vai causar um impacto melhor nessa condição planetária. Porque, querendo ou não, esse indivíduo vai sofrer negativamente também desses impactos. A gente tá numa cadeia onde tudo é junto.
[00:18:42] Speaker 6: It's estimated that if meat really sold for what it honestly cost to produce, if the beef producers had to pay for all the water that irrigates the alfalfa that's government subsidized, that's all the water that's polluted from the slaughterhouse, all the soil that runs off the corn and soybean fields, all the pesticides and herbicides that are sprayed on those grains that wind up causing cancer, if they had to pay for the therapies or the farm workers spraying those chemicals, this is unsustainable. It's a spectacularly expensive substance animal flesh these days.
[00:19:17] Speaker 14: It's not easy to close our eyes. It's not easy to close our eyes. So, it's not easy to look at the food as something linked from the product chain where it comes from. So, if we don't start to modifying this, we will, as a professional, lose the potential that we have to maintain a better world for generations.
[00:19:36] Speaker 12: There are a lot of people who fume and say: "I know that it's cancer, but I want to fumar." Do you know how much it's processed food and the cancerous level you put in it? I think people don't know. If we could first make people understand that the vegetables and the vegetables are as cheap as they are and they are much more healthy, that's why I tell you, I think the information is very important, right?
[00:20:03] Speaker 1: Small family farming operations are often swimming in debt, while agribusiness conglomerates are thriving. But despite not generating many jobs, destroying the Amazon forest and polluting the environment, big agribusiness receives billions in tax subsidies, while small family farmers receive on average 10 times less in incentives, those same small farms are responsible for producing 80 percent of the food that feeds the planet.
[00:20:33] Speaker 5: Agribusiness only exists because of tax subsidies. You remove all federal, local subsidies from the production of animal agriculture. A pound of beef would cost $100. A gallon of milk would cost $75. A family of four going to McDonald's without subsidies would spend $120 on their meal. So our tax dollars subsidize an industry that's destroying our health health and destroying the health of the planet. And if we speak up about it, we risk being thrown in jail and killed.
[00:21:05] Speaker 15: And when I start talking about it, many people talking about it, saying that they support the country, they support the country, and it's the contrary. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money. And if we do not have a lot of money, we do not have a lot of money.
[00:21:36] Speaker 1: If we produced and consumed more plant products instead of animal products, this would mitigate much of the human-generated greenhouse gas emission and would provide a home once again for the countless wild species displaced due to animal agriculture each year. But reducing the consumption of meat oftentimes makes people concerned. Will you get enough nutrients? And what about protein?
[00:22:07] Speaker 14: When you remove the meat, you do not cause a protein deficiency. It is interesting to see this correlation between animal and vegetal proteins, because I can say this: we need that. The animal kingdom provides that and the vegetable provides that. The vegetable provides less than the animal, but provides more than we need. So this makes us a total security. We have a diet based on plants, especially if it is based on natural foods.
[00:22:34] Speaker 3: The question often comes up is: how much of a diet change do I need to make? And my answer is: any step you make is a good step. So when people reduce meat consumption, that's good. That said, I have to say that when people get it out of their lives completely, they really get their diet into high gear and their health improves dramatically. But any step is a good step. That's a good step.
[00:22:53] Speaker 14: These data are very clear, they are very well established, and today, I don't see anyone who doesn't want to research. And I understand that we must use it as a food within our prescription.
[00:23:03] Speaker 1: One shocking and little-known fact is that deforestation increases the prevalence of diseases all around the world, including malaria, zika, dengue fever, SARS, Ebola, leptosporiasis, and many others. Because deforestation changes how and where these animals transmit these diseases. Once their natural habitat and ecosystem balance becomes disrupted, they end up getting closer to small towns surrounding those areas, increasing the chances of transmitting diseases to humans.
[00:23:49] Speaker 13: A consciência do perigo do aparecimento de novas doenças importantes para os seres humanos e para os animais, advindos do povoamento humano e da destruição da Amazônia, não é conhecido do grande público, e muito menos da mídia, que pouco fala nisso. Há muitos vírus, fungos, bactérias, patógenos de todo jeito na Amazônia. Eles têm os seus hospedeiros e eles vivem em controle. Quando esse meio ambiente é mexido, isso altera completamente e você introduz um outro aspecto, que é o homem, de uma forma muito brutal. Então, o homem fica susceptível a muitas doenças que já têm na Amazônia até absolutamente desconhecidas, provavelmente causadas por vírus. Por exemplo, zika saiu de uma pequena floresta na África. AIDS saiu dos macacos de uma floresta também na África e afetou o mundo todo. Então, vírus tem uma capacidade de mobilidade impressionante. Ainda não aconteceu esse tipo de aparecimento de vírus tão letal, como o caso de zika e AIDS, mas outras viroses importantes que também matam, que a gente não conhece, não sabe nem qual é a fonte. Nós já temos essas patologias que eram só conhecidas na Amazônia e que já não estão mais na Amazônia só. E isso pode ir para a Europa, para os Estados Unidos, para a África. Então, esse é um problema mundial. É um problema da ciência, é um problema da educação e é um problema da informação.
[00:25:16] Speaker 1: Deforestation also affects the quality of the air. When tons of harmful and toxic particles are released into the atmosphere during these fires, the particles travel by wind currents and end up affecting not only the local populations, but people in the big cities as well.
[00:25:34] Speaker 16: As queimadas também, elas têm um impacto sobre a saúde humana, né? Porque elas aumentam a poluição atmosférica nessas áreas onde as queimadas ocorrem. Então, você já tem registros de redução da qualidade do ar, que afeta sobretudo as crianças, as pessoas mais idosas dentro das comunidades, porque aumenta a quantidade de material particular. Então, você tem impactos que não são só impactos ecológicos, mas que começam a atingir também as comunidades que vivem nessas áreas que são muito afetadas aí no arco do desmatamento, né? E você tem também consequências, eu diria, continentais, né? Porque fumaça que é gerada pela queima da biomassa, ela viaja dessa área do arco do desmatamento, desce para o sul do Brasil e afeta também regiões fora do arco do desmatamento. Então, o que a gente chama de um fenômeno transfronteriço.
[00:26:26] Speaker 17: Então, as pessoas em São Paulo acabam sendo afetadas também por isso. Pouca gente sabe disso. Mas tem estudos muito bem feitos mostrando que quando reduziu o desmatamento da Amazônia, o número de mortes por doenças respiratórias e doenças cardíacas do centro-sul do Brasil E até dos países vizinhos.
[00:26:46] Speaker 1: Forrestes play a key role in local water cycles by helping to keep a balance between the water on land and the water in the atmosphere. But when deforestation and degradation occur, that balance can be thrown off, resulting in changes in precipitation and river flow, and affect the climate both locally and on a global scale.
[00:27:08] Speaker 18: A Amazônia tem uma importância enorme de regulação climática. A gente fala que a Amazônia não é o pulmão do mundo, mas ela é o ar-condicionado do planeta. A América Latina, ela tem uma função incrível e fundamental para a própria agricultura, porque ela que mantém o regime de chuvas. Se estima mais ou menos que 70% do PIB hoje da América Latina depende das chuvas da Amazônia. Então, a gente necessita mesmo combater o desmatamento, não só por uma questão econômica, mas também por todo o processo de mudança climática que a gente está vivendo e vai viver nos próximos anos.
[00:27:38] Speaker 17: A floresta é bastante ligada à disponibilidade de água no resto do Brasil. Esse termo que já tem se usado, que é chamado de rios voadores. Tem uma enorme quantidade de água que é carregada da Amazônia pelas nuvens e chega nas outras regiões. Se a gente perde essa floresta, a tendência é que haja uma redução de água que vai chegar nessas outras regiões. Então, essa é uma preocupação. Nos últimos 15 anos, aconteceram três grandes secas na Amazônia que não deveriam ter acontecido. E claro, acaba isso também afetando a agricultura.
[00:28:11] Speaker 2: Você está vendo isso em todo o mundo. A consequência disso não é apenas destruição dos ecossistemas, mas, na verdade, a toda a Amazônia do Amazon está tendo dificuldade em suportar a agricultura. Será difícil manter o tipo de agricultura que temos agora em 25 anos. O Brasil depende muito da chuva para as hidrelétricas, por exemplo. tem projeção mostrando que o Brasil perderia parte da capacidade de produzir uma parte importante da energia que hoje vem das hidrelétricas.
[00:28:37] Speaker 17: O Brasil depende muito da chuva para as hidrelétricas, por exemplo. tem projeção mostrando que o Brasil perderia parte da capacidade de produzir uma parte importante da energia que hoje vem das hidrelétricas.
[00:28:50] Speaker 7: A chuva de chuva tem muito de chuva. É um ecossistema muito seco e o chuva e a água circulam através disso. Quando você corta a chuva, você permite que o sol penetra no terra, na vegetação. E a água circula no terra, na região do que o sol penetra no terra. A água circula no terra, na região do que o sol penetra no terra. into the forest. The result of that has been a real dramatic increase of forest fires in areas where there never would have been fire, they wouldn't have been fire prone because
[00:29:21] Speaker 1: of all the moisture and ecosystem. Because the soil in the deforested areas is usually poor in nutrients, many farmers are forced to use more resilient GMO crops that can withstand harsh conditions and larger amounts of pesticides. But these excess pesticides end up in the food chain. The grain is fed to the cattle which are then eaten by humans. Also the pesticides run off the fields to the water beds and rivers, creating a lot of pollution, disturbing the ecosystems and causing disease. The overuse of pesticide and fertilizer is one
[00:29:56] Speaker 19: of the main contaminants for water pollution. So not only are these crops causing forest loss and causing climate change, they're also causing a local water pollution crisis. In
[00:30:08] Speaker 20: Enquanto a maioria das pessoas associa o acúmulo de agrotóxicos a vegetais, esses resíduos também podem aparecer em carnes e produtos de origem animal. Isso porque eles são bioacumulativos. Portanto, a ração que os animais ingerem e a pastagem que eles comem, muitas vezes contaminada por agrotóxico, ela se transfere para essa carne e ela pode contaminar inclusive humanos.
[00:30:28] Speaker 15: O agrotóxico não paga uma série de impostos no país, que também é um outro problema, que também destrói muito. O Brasil é o país que mais consome agrotóxicos. E a gente tá vindo agora, um novo governo que pretende liberar muito mais que estão proibidos no mundo inteiro. E isso, além obviamente de envenenar todos nós que comemos, você tá também envenenando esse solo,
[00:30:48] Speaker 20: a nossa água, nossas maiores riquezas. A pecore permite que seus fertilizantes, por exemplo, sejam despejados sem nenhum tratamento em sistemas de água. Isso leva com que as empresas de tratamento de água tenham que investir na recuperação dessa água e que os contribuintes acabam pagando um preço maior. Todos esses impactos, eles geram custos gigantescos. Um relatório de 2015, por exemplo, estimou que para cerca de um milhão de lucro feito pela pecuária, a gente tem cerca de 22 milhões de prejuízo ambiental. A falta de regulamentação dessas externalidades permite, então, que a pecuária continue degradando sem ter que se responsabilizar por esses custos.
[00:31:27] Speaker 7: eles estão cortando a praia, estão mudando o ecossistema, estão despejando pesticidas na terra, destruindo a capacidade da terra de produzir comida para as pessoas.
[00:31:37] Speaker 21: Cara, não tem futuro, velho. No future, cara. Agora esse momento terraplanista que estamos vivendo, cara, estamos voltando à época medieval, saca? É um momento obscuro pra caramba que eu acho que isso vai passar. Mas a gente tem um momento dark dance-a-red aí, fudido, cara. Eu acho que isso vai ser bom pras pessoas que têm mais consciência se unirem. Vão aparecer grandes líderes. Já tem grandes líderes aparecendo aí. Porque agora, esse momento aqui, é o momento dos idiotas, cara. A carne é só um detalhe, cara.
[00:32:18] Speaker 1: HUNDREDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS ARE KILLED EVERY YEAR ALL OVER THE WORLD. WITH THE MAJORITY BEING INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, THE AMAZON IS ONE OF THE AREAS WITH THE MOST TENSION. Last year, Brazil was once again the deadliest country for environmentalists. And despite efforts by national environmental agencies, justice is rare.
[00:32:40] Speaker 9: A produção pecuária ainda está completamente associado a uma cadeia criminosa, em grande medida. Junto com o desmatamento, quando cresce o desmatamento em geral, a violência cresce também.
[00:32:51] Speaker 17: Mas tem gente que ainda nem sabe que tem gado na Alasônia. Veio uma coisa muito distante. Então, algumas pessoas têm realmente uma ignorância grande sobre o que acontece na região.
[00:33:01] Speaker 20: Entre os anos de 2008 e 2018, o rebanho na Amazônia cresceu cerca de 20%. Quatro vezes mais da média nacional, que foi de 5%. Então, hoje, a gente tem cerca de 86 milhões de bovinos na região da Amazônia Legal. O que é 40% do rebanho nacional inteiro. E a gente tem uma ocupação aí de gado de cerca de um campo de futebol para cada animal. O que é uma área bastante grande.
[00:33:23] Speaker 15: Mais de 80% da população brasileira não tem essa informação. Ou mesmo se tem, não acredita, acha que é fake news. Não consegue entender a importância disso, a gravidade e a urgência disso.
[00:33:33] Speaker 21: Então, para ativista aqui é um momento crítico, cara. Você ser um ativista no Brasil agora, cara, você é comunista, cara. E comunista agora, aqui, é perigoso. Se você está do lado deles, você está contra eles, cara.
[00:33:46] Speaker 15: Eu sofri muitas repesalhas quando eu comecei a combater de frente a indústria. Comecei a tentar alertar as pessoas. Eu trabalhava na televisão, não trabalho mais por conta disso. Eu ia começar um programa o ano passado na emissora. Eu nem cheguei a gravar o piloto. Fui mandada embora antes por conta do meu ativismo na assembleia contra os pecuaristas. O dono da emissora também era um pecuarista. E também vários anos sendo são pecuaristas. Então, assim, é quem manda mesmo no nosso país. Eles mandam e desmandam. Nossa bancada ruralista é fortíssima.
[00:34:17] Speaker 7: São pessoas do Pilipício já receberam ameaças de morte. Isso acontece, especialmente o pessoal que está mais, como a gente fala, na linha da emissora. São pessoas do Pilipício já receberam ameaças de morte. Isso acontece, especialmente o pessoal que está mais, como a gente fala, na linha de frente ou no trecho, que é fazendo as atividades de campo.
[00:34:37] Speaker 9: Mas se você comparar o nível de segurança da equipe do Pilipício, se comparado com movimentos indígenas, quilombolas, com as comunidades tradicionais, o nível de ameaça que eles estão sofrendo é tão tamanho, é tão gigante, que eu não tenho muita vontade de enaltecer as ameaças de ameaças de morte. Se comparado com o que esses caras estão sofrendo, se comparado com o que esses caras estão sofrendo.
[00:35:10] Speaker 15: Bom, o Brasil é o país que mais mata ativistas, principalmente o pessoal que trabalha diretamente ali, na região da floresta. Eu mesma recebo muitas ameaças. Envolve muito, muito, muito dinheiro, muito poder.
[00:35:25] Speaker 5: Animal agriculture is a huge industry, and a hugely powerful industry, and a hugely violent and destructive industry. Not just towards animals, not just towards the environment, but towards activists as well. I mean, activists have been killed for standing up to cattle ranchers. But still, like so many local legislatures, so many politicians essentially work for agribusiness.
[00:35:50] Speaker 1: Our team went to the state of Bahia to meet with Ernst Gottsch, a Swiss farmer and researcher that moved to Brazil in the 1980s. For the last 40 years, Ernst has developed techniques that combine agricultural production with forest regeneration. By combining aggressive pruning and innovative agroforestry techniques, Ernst showed the world that degraded areas can be regenerated, and that the forest can be exploited without being destroyed. The set of principles and techniques he developed became globally known as syntropic farming. Its practical applications can be seen in several large farms around the world, and on his own property, where he was able to regenerate over 1,000 acres of degraded land.
[00:36:44] Speaker 22: We need to create agroecosystems similar in its dynamic and in its way of functioning with natural and original ecosystems. If you want to use milho and soja in that place, you can plant milho and soja, but not exclude the forest ecosystem. If you want more food, plant more trees. If you want more food for animals from Porto Grande, plant more trees. And plant those trees. So it gives life to the soil, it gives a lot of organic material. So my presence is that I'm dealing with the ecosystem. And this is not less food, it gives a lot more food. It gives a lot more photosynthesis. It gives a lot more oxygen of water in the system. It gives a lot of water in the system, when I have a lot of organic material, which is a pre-condition for the transformation of the organic material, is a pre-condition for that there is milho, that there is soja. In order to create deserts, we will not create prosperity. And then there will be a lot of land. There will be a lot more life, a lot more space. There will be a lot more prosperity, a lot of peace, a lot of life. We have everything in our hands. We can do it in a different way. We can do it in a different way. Everything we can do. There will be a lot more if we wanted to do it. If we wanted to do it abundantly, if we wanted to do it in favor of nature and not against nature.
[00:38:14] Speaker 1: On the other side of the country, one of Ernst Gotch's students is following in his footsteps, and applying the same principles in his own syntropic farm. Juan Pereira, a young biologist and farmer, shared his thoughts on the burning of the Amazon forest.
[00:38:32] Speaker 23: The burning of the Earth is only 7% of the burning of the Earth. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away.
[00:38:59] Speaker 22: The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the Earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the burning of the earth is going to go away. The burning of the burning of the earth is going to go away.
[00:39:14] Speaker 20: The burning of the burning of the burning of the burning of the earth is going to go away.
[00:39:39] Speaker 4: The tragedy of this continued destruction of the rainforest in Brazil is that it doesn't need to happen. That food can be developed in cleared land. They don't need to destroy more rainforests. It's just a question of doing what's right. That might happen because of government policy, but it also can very well happen because the public is demanding it, and the consumer is demanding it as well. We're talking about very basic practice changes,
[00:40:05] Speaker 2: like growing crops on previously deforested land instead of burning down a new rainforest. Putting cover crops when there's not corn or soy growing. Having buffer zones next to waterways. These are really basic, affordable things that often actually make farmers more money in the long term.
[00:40:31] Speaker 1: Some agribusinesses in Brazil are beginning to transition to intensive farming, which confines the cattle into smaller areas and results in less native forest destruction. But researchers warn that intensive farming comes with its own set of problems.
[00:40:47] Speaker 16: "I've heard many of them say that we substitute a pecuária extensiva pela pecuária intensiva, but the pecuária intensiva also creates impacts, because I will need to produce a production of another way. I will have impacts on the soil, I will also have impacts on the atmosphere. Not any place in the pecuária today that supports a process of intensification. So, sometimes we try to substitute one alternative by another without also being able to consider that it can bring some impacts. And then, if we have a more healthy diet, maybe it will be a win-win-win.
[00:41:22] Speaker 20: A estimative is that we need between 11 and 17 calories oriundas de soja and grãos to convert this into a protein of animal protein. So, we see the use, the use of soja and grãos is extremely inefficient. If this percentage, if this percentage of soja was destined to human consumption, we would have enough grãos to feed the population of the planet.
[00:41:48] Speaker 9: The offering of what comes to the supermarket or the shops for the consumer to consume has to change. And that depends on the responsibility and the responsibility of public policies too.
[00:41:59] Speaker 2: I do think that we, as a society, need to dramatically reduce our consumption of meat. It's both good for the planet and good for us. But the big agribusinesses have a role to play as well. And they should be engaging in the basic good practices to hang on to the forest that we have left and not to pollute the already damaged waterways.
[00:42:21] Speaker 1: Our journey took us to Tucson, Arizona, home to Biosphere 2, the largest simulated rainforest research facility in the world. Biosphere was perhaps best known for two missions conducted in the early 1990s in which crews were sealed inside the enclosure to study survivability. Nowadays, Biosphere 2 is home to several world-renowned scientists who conduct controlled experiments in order to study complex environmental questions. Biosphere 2 is really a remarkable facility. It offered a really unique opportunity to look at how
[00:42:51] Speaker ?: these systems respond to changes
[00:42:52] Speaker 24: like carbon dioxide, like moisture, like temperature. and so that began the shift for Biosphere 2. Moving away from having people live inside to moving to one as a large earth and environmental science laboratory. Actually, the largest earth and environmental science laboratory. It is impossible to think that we'll ever recreate nature as it occurs naturally outside in all of its intricacies and complexities. And so Biosphere 2 is a test lab. We can do things like subjected to a drought. We predict that the tropics are going to continue to get warmer and drier. Well, what's that mean for those systems? I think the biggest lesson so far to come out of Biosphere is how little we truly understand earth systems as a whole, how those systems are interconnected and how those systems are impacted by the changes that we see coming their way. We were able to take our rainforest, run it through different levels of CO2 and look at how its response compared to those that the model predicted. And what we found is that our system, like that predicted for the tropical areas in South America, it saturated at about the same level. What happens when we surpass this level? Well, now it means there's nothing out there that is absorbing it or taking the place of those rainforests. And now rather than that CO2 going up at a particular pace, now we've accelerated it significantly. And so what we learn here potentially has real world applications. And regardless of how much we learn or how much we think we know, it's extremely important to continue to maintain that biological diversity in those systems because we just don't understand what the implications of losing those systems is going to be. We have an idea, but I don't think we fully comprehend. And we all have an inherent desire to survive and persist. And if we're not able to adapt to changes coming our way, it often times means when species can't adapt, you see them go extinct.
[00:45:10] Speaker 1: Despite the global concern about the Amazon forest, most people interested in helping the cause feel powerless due to the distance, complexity, and scale of the problem. So what can we, as regular citizens, do to help?
[00:45:25] Speaker 2: I think the challenge that we face is people may have great concern about what's happening in the Amazon or elsewhere, but people don't know what to do to act on this concern. Look, at the individual level, I think there's two big things people can do. One, reduce the amount of meat that people are eating. Most people in the developed world eat way too much meat, and it's not good for you, and it's not good for the planet. But the other thing that we can do to drive change on a systematic level is for consumers to go talk to the brands that they patronize about these issues. Just sending an email to the CEO of a big company linked to deforestation actually can get heard, but, you know, what's even more important is if you go on social media, send them a message, if you talk in person to the manager of a fast food restaurant or a supermarket chain, that pretty soon starts to make its way up the food chain in the corporation, and they start to say, "Hey, we're hearing about this. We're worried that customers are leaving us because of our connection to climate pollution, to deforestation, and going over to our competitor who's doing more to deliver sustainable products."
[00:46:28] Speaker 5: The only way corporations become good corporate citizens is when they're held accountable by people. Every corporation in the world, for the most part, will get away with whatever they can get away with. You know, their goal is to make their product as cheaply as possible and sell it for as much as possible, you know, to keep their shareholders and their board happy. They will engage in the worst corporate practices unless we hold them responsible.
[00:46:49] Speaker 2: I think what we found over and over again is that when consumers bring urgency around these issues to companies, they're actually incredibly responsive. These companies value their brands over any other asset in their company. So when that brand is threatened, when consumers start to think about their brands not as a wholesome snack or meal, but rather as a driver of ecological destruction and human rights abuse on a vast scale, that's going to threaten the value of their company. And that causes even the most cold-hearted corporate executive to sit up and pay attention. We've also found that employees of these companies have outsized influence. So one of the strongest voices for change, even in companies that have done the most damage, is from their own employees. People increasingly want to work at companies where they feel like they're doing something good for the world. That's true even of the agribusiness giants, of fast food chains, of mainstream supermarkets.
[00:47:45] Speaker 20: For foreigners who are worried and who want to help in relation to what is happening in Brazil, it's very good to think about choosing their representatives. These representatives are going to implement public policies that will have a direct impact, both in international trade and climate change.
[00:48:03] Speaker 1: In Brazil, agribusiness is protected by laws that support the industry's actions. But how is this possible? The people in power in South America are often those with ties to big agribusiness. Many of the most powerful politicians in Brazil's government are connected to the meat and dairy industries. And they create laws for their own benefit. This group of politicians is called the Ruralista Congressional Bloc.
[00:48:31] Speaker 2: We've seen tremendous environmental rollbacks here in our country, but sadly it doesn't really compare to what's happening in Brazil. Tragically, Brazil made a huge amount of progress on reducing deforestation over the last decade. They cut deforestation by more than two-thirds through both private sector efforts and government action. They improved environmental enforcement. They created both new national parks and indigenous areas. The big soy and cattle companies actually took significant efforts to reduce deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon that worked. Unfortunately, due to issues unrelated to the environment, Brazil elected a man who, in office, has said about gutting environmental protections.
[00:49:11] Speaker 25: Other governments in the past, they also neglected. The difference between the current government now is that they transformed the environmental destruction into the politics of their government. It's not about neglecting, it's about promoting, it's about supporting.
[00:49:29] Speaker 2: I think the biggest threat to the environment that we've seen from the Bolsonaro era so far hasn't been any specific policy change. Instead, he's given farmers the sense of impunity, that no matter how much they deforest, no matter how much illegal activity they engage in, no matter how many indigenous people they displaced from their land, the government won't take action. And as a result, we've seen big soy and cattle ranchers deforest at probably an unprecedented scale. Just this past month, we saw 1,345 square kilometers of the Brazilian Amazon go up in smoke. That's an area the size of Los Angeles, cleared of native vegetation in just one month.
[00:50:12] Speaker 20: The policy of the current government in relation to the environment of its minister, Ricardo Salles, in fact, is an anti-political. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:50:31] Speaker 25: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:50:49] Speaker 17: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:51:15] Speaker 9: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:51:44] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:52:07] Speaker 2: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:52:37] Speaker 26: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:52:42] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment.
[00:52:42] Speaker 26: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:07] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:20] Speaker 2: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:27] Speaker 12: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:37] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:42] Speaker 1: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:53:58] Speaker 4: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:54:24] Speaker 9: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:54:51] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:55:08] Speaker 12: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:55:13] Speaker 9: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:55:37] Speaker 2: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:55:39] Speaker 7: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:55:58] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:56:13] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment.
[00:56:14] Speaker 1: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:56:37] Speaker 2: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:57:56] Speaker 7: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:58:24] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:58:34] Speaker 1: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:58:54] Speaker 17: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:59:30] Speaker 2: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[00:59:42] Speaker 7: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:00:22] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:00:52] Speaker 1: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:01:23] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment.
[01:01:24] Speaker 17: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:01:38] Speaker 9: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:01:52] Speaker 20: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:02:06] Speaker 7: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:02:24] Speaker ?: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment.
[01:02:30] Speaker 1: It's a policy against the environment. It's a policy against the environment. Recently, the city of Sao Paulo implemented Meatless Mondays in all public schools in the region.
[01:02:46] Speaker 27: A campanha Segunda Sem Carne surgiu nos Estados Unidos em 2003 na faculdade de John Hopkins, na faculdade de Saúde Pública. E a gente trouxe para o Brasil em 2009. A ideia é convidar a população a substituir a proteína animal pela proteína vegetal pelo menos uma vez por semana. Isso vai trazer benefícios para a saúde, para o meio ambiente e para os animais. Apesar do Brasil ser considerado o país do churrasco, a gente tem um grande apoio da população. Porque a campanha é convidativa, ela não é impositiva. A gente tem que o brasileiro consome muito mais proteínas de origem animal do que deveria. Então, a Segunda Sem Carne é um passo. Fica muito mais fácil. É um convite à população. Você consegue ficar um dia sempre de origem animal? E aí a pessoa vai descobrindo novos sabores. O prato do brasileiro é o arroz, feijão, bife e batata. Então, a maior dificuldade que as pessoas têm é a questão social. Tira a carne e coloca o quê no lugar? Mas a gente sabe que o prato em si já está balanceado por causa do arroz e feijão. E aí a gente vai trabalhando com receitas. O Brasil é rico em verduras, legumes. O brasileiro está muito apto. A gente tem pesquisas que mostram que 63% da população quer reduzir o consumo de carne. Então, a Segunda Sem Carne é um passo para a pessoa conhecer novos sabores.
[01:04:12] Speaker 28: A proposta do cardápio escolar sustentável está bastante ligada às questões de saúde e bem-estar das crianças, com certeza. Mas também a gente tem um objetivo maior, que é ligar as questões da sustentabilidade do planeta. Então, é importante que além de servir a comida para as crianças, que as cozinheiras façam comidas gostosas, apresentem pratos bonitos e saborosos, que as professoras possam conversar com as crianças sobre o que elas estão comendo, sobre os alimentos e sobre o planeta e sobre a importância de que, se alimentando, ele está contribuindo para a sustentabilidade do planeta. Na rede municipal de São Paulo, são servidas mais de 2,2 milhões de refeições ao dia. Então, isso significa um impacto muito grande para o planeta. Menos alimentos com carne, menos desmatamento, menos água consumida por pessoa. Para além dos ganhos com a saúde, com o bem-estar e educativos, eu acredito que os municípios consigam um ganho também de economia. Porque, com certeza, os legumes, as verduras são mais baratas do que a carne.
[01:05:31] Speaker 27: E para as cozinheiras da rede entenderem mais o que é a segunda sem carne, a gente vai começar um treinamento para 11 mil. Então, todas as cozinheiras da rede vão ser capacitadas para essa nova alimentação, com novas receitas e descobrir o poder que elas têm de transformar o meio ambiente.
[01:05:50] Speaker 12: Eu acho que essa segunda-feira sem carne nas escolas, os pais mesmo vão chegar e dizer, por favor, não dê nem na segunda, nem na terça, nem na quarta, nem na quinta, mas eu acho que já é um bom começo. Eu acho que a segunda-feira sem carne nas escolas deveria ser, não só nas escolas, mas em tudo que é lugar.
[01:06:13] Speaker 1: Quando se trata dos fogos de amazônia, uma vítima indiretta é raramente mencionada. Cada ano, mais de 50 milhões de animais são criados e mortos para produção de carne no Brasil, apenas. Um fato que não só resulta em deforestation, poluição de água e emissão de gases vegetais, mas também resulta em a perda de milhões de vidas de animais.
[01:06:38] Speaker 29: Eu acho que o brasileiro não faz ideia do que os animais passam no processo de produção de alimentos na indústria brasileira. Quando a gente começou a soltar vídeos e investigações lá de fora, dos Estados Unidos, Canadá e México, os brasileiros falavam que aquilo não acontecia no Brasil. Mas, na verdade, quando a gente começou a soltar as investigações feitas aqui no Brasil, os brasileiros certamente ficaram chocados, assim como os grandes veículos de comunicação. A gente pôde perceber que as pessoas não têm ideia de praticamente todas as práticas que acontecem em fazendas, granjas e abatedouros. Uma pessoa que já está reduzindo o consumo de carne naturalmente já está promovendo um impacto positivo comparado ao que ela já promovia. Eu costumo dizer que cinco pessoas que estão reduzindo o consumo de carne pela metade impactam mais animais do que dois veganos. Então, a redução do consumo de produtos de origem animal, de carne vermelha, de outros tipos de carne, é importantíssima para já estar causando um impacto direto na vida dos animais. Eu acho que, realmente, as pessoas não fazem essa conexão do produto que elas estão consumindo e comprando no supermercado com os animais. As embalagens e a publicidade fazem de tudo para disfarçar o que é, de fato, esse produto. Eu acho que, apesar de elas saberem que foram animais, é difícil para elas fazerem a conexão do que aquilo representa.
[01:08:01] Speaker 20: Através da publicidade e do marketing, as empresas do agronegócio, elas vendem uma imagem de sustentáveis, de pop, de moderna, quando, na verdade, elas estão praticando uma série de irregularidades, mas isso fica muito longe das vistas do consumidor final. Então, a visão ainda da maioria da população brasileira é uma visão idílica, utópica, de uma criação de gado quase que em regime familiar, onde os animais são muito bem tratados e onde não há floresta destruída. Eu sempre disse que eu gostava de bicho.
[01:08:29] Speaker 12: Como é que eu podia fazer isso, cara? Como é que eu fiz isso por tanto tempo? Qual é a diferença entre a dana e uma vaca? Sabe que um fazal alto e fala: "Mu?" Qual é a diferença?
[01:08:43] Speaker 22: A gente mete os nossos animais em prisão de arame farpado, de cerca elétrica. E depois vai na fila de morte. Ou seja, a gente mete ela na panela. E ela, em compensação, nos mete no inferno.
[01:09:12] Speaker 1: Não é apenas a floresta amazônia. Não é só a floresta amazônia. Não é só a floresta amazônia. A floresta, a california, a indonesia, a rússia, a congo, and several other parts of the world, are experiencing the most destructive and devastating fires in decades. Many of these fires are exacerbated by global warming. The Amazon fires, in particular, are part of a complex problem involving politics, big business, and prolific corruption. The political landscape is complicated. The agroindustria is very powerful, and challenging these dominant forces can be dangerous and difficult. There is certainly a great deal of work to be done. And there are many brave people fighting in the trenches to change these systems. But fortunately for you and I, we have the power to create positive change for the Amazon forest. Each of us, as individuals, is empowered to protect the Amazon. And that power lies at the end of our knives and forks. Because we can make choices when it comes to the food we eat. By reducing or eliminating the consumption of meat in our diets, not only are we helping to prevent climate change, but we are also protecting the Amazon forest for present and future generations to come.
[01:10:29] Speaker 15: It is a chaotic moment, and not only for Brazil. It is what people have to understand, right? The forest is a heritage of humanity. And all of us are going to take this tragedy. And I think that the world is still not aware of the tragedy that comes to us.
[01:10:46] Speaker 7: It is a frightening time, frankly. But I think that people can change. And when change happens, it generally happens pretty quickly. And I think we are reaching a turning point. And we are really hoping and we are banking on the fact that all of the things have gotten to this point. People are going to change their behaviors and we are going to be able to turn things around.
[01:11:05] Speaker 5: There is this interesting fallacy in philosophy. It is called the is-ought fallacy. And what it basically means is to justify something that you are doing because it has been done is wrong. And we can see that very easily. So, on one hand, people look at animal agriculture and they say, "But people have always eaten meat." And I would say, "Yeah, but women used to not be allowed to vote." And we can very clearly see how logically, ethically, that is completely wrong. We used to be able to smoke on airplanes. Like, we keep making progress. And progress involves rejecting a past that we now deem to be unethical and wrong. And the next thing we have to do is reject the use of animals for food. For the animals, for us, and for this only home that we have.
[01:11:50] Speaker 3: In our clinic, when people learn to change their diets, they're replacing the meat with healthier foods. Their health rebounds. It's amazing to see. Their lives are changed. The earth is the same way. That when we change our eating habits globally, the environment can rebound. The forests can regrow. We don't have to wait. We can do that now. I say, "Let's put it to work."
[01:12:12] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:12:43] Speaker 30: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:12:49] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way."
[01:12:50] Speaker 30: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:12:54] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:27] Speaker 31: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:42] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:43] Speaker 31: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:46] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:47] Speaker 31: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:51] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:53] Speaker 31: "The earth is the same way."
[01:13:54] Speaker ?: "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way." "The earth is the same way."