Do you mean in terms of PR ala "big tobacco lobbied and biased the social perception (and scientific enquiry) of its products", or do you mean in terms of personal harm?
b/c I'd find it hard to believe meat could be as harmful because, morality aside, smoking is very personally unhealthy, systematically.
Given the environmental impact, I'd sooner compare it to fossil fuel consumption, or (micro)plastics disposal.
b/c I'd find it hard to believe meat could be as harmful because, morality aside, smoking is very personally unhealthy, systematically.
Given the environmental impact, I'd sooner compare it to fossil fuel consumption, or (micro)plastics disposal.