I do agree with your point. I don’t see why we should try to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of the land, particularly when human health will suffer as a result.

I think with regards optimal diet, we really aren’t particularly overpopulated. I have a little background in the sociology of the developing world, and poverty and famine is far more to do with war, cash crops, and inappropriate land use than too many people. In fact rural families are large specifically because the more hands you have, the more food you can produce for everyone. The point when this changes is when people move into cities and can’t feed lots of children on a factory wage.

Britain is one of the most heavily populated countries on the planet – but we could actually pretty much meet our demand for food without importing if we had to. I think it would do the world a favour if we drank less coffee and tea and ate less vegetables from Africa though.

And while the optimal land use may be achieved by a bit of meat consumption, I don’t think 2 ounces of mear per day really cuts it for most omnivores.

I’m not on board with the idea that we should all be vegans in order to accomodate more people. The fact is that for an optimal diet, the planet is already overpopulated.

Instead of trying to get the planet to accomodate more people, we need to address the real problem: population. Otherwise it just pushes the crisis to the point where we have no maneuvering room.