The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it is “engaging with agricultural groups” after it deleted a tweet about reducing red meat consumption.
The tweet advised people to cut down on red meat to be healthier and that it could be done slowly by “veggie lunches” and “meat free Mondays”.
The post also pointed out 10 per cent of meat bought is thrown out.
The Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) said the tweet had caused considerable anger among farmers “who feel it goes beyond the remit of the EPA and is not consistent with Government dietary guidelines”. It asked the post be removed “as a matter of urgency” and that the EPA “would sit down with the IFA to discuss the rationale behind this post, who authorised it and how it fits in with the remit of the EPA”.
Radio: Tempers rise over immigration debate as Matt Cooper scolds warring politicians
‘I want someone to take an actual stand on immigration’: How will TCD student debaters vote?
Spice Village takeaway review: Indian food in south Dublin that will keep you coming back
Trump’s cabinet: who’s been picked, who’s in the running?
The EPA said it has a responsibility to provide the public with advice on any measure that “may help to protect and sustain our environment and lower carbon emissions”.
“We regularly share sustainable options on social media platforms that some people might like to explore and, from time to time, this includes advice on food and food waste,” a statement from the EPA said.
The agency added it acknowledged that the tweet was “open to interpretation”.
“Our intention was to share helpful advice, not to cause any confusion, but we acknowledge how it may have been perceived differently,” it said.
“Therefore, we decided to remove the tweet to avoid any unnecessary attention on what is a complex area. We are engaging with agricultural groups on this and we are confident that the engagement will bring clarity for all.”
Sadhbh O’ Neill, coordinator of the Stop Climate Chaos coalition, said the scientific basis for advising the public to reduce meat consumption “could not be more clear”.
She added: “If the EPA wants to be taken seriously as an impartial scientific body, then it must continue to tell the truth, even if the message is inconvenient or unwelcome.”
