Dataset Information

Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts.

ABSTRACT: Modelled dietary scenarios often fail to reflect true dietary practice and do not account for variation in the environmental burden of food due to sourcing and production methods. Here we link dietary data from a sample of 55,504 vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters with food-level data on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, eutrophication risk and potential biodiversity loss from a review of 570 life-cycle assessments covering more than 38,000 farms in 119 countries. Our results include the variation in food production and sourcing that is observed in the review of life-cycle assessments. All environmental indicators showed a positive association with amounts of animal-based food consumed. Dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1-37.0%) of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1-44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0-81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4-40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0-65.3%) for biodiversity. At least 30% differences were found between low and high meat-eaters for most indicators. Despite substantial variation due to where and how food is produced, the relationship between environmental impact and animal-based food consumption is clear and should prompt the reduction of the latter.

SUBMITTER: Scarborough P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10365988 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts.

Scarborough Peter P Clark Michael M Cobiac Linda L Papier Keren K Knuppel Anika A Lynch John J Harrington Richard R Key Tim T Springmann Marco M

Nature food 20230720 7

Modelled dietary scenarios often fail to reflect true dietary practice and do not account for variation in the environmental burden of food due to sourcing and production methods. Here we link dietary data from a sample of 55,504 vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters with food-level data on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, eutrophication risk and potential biodiversity loss from a review of 570 life-cycle assessments covering more than 38,000 farms in 119 countries. Our ...[more]

PMID: 37474804

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFollowing a vegetarian diet has become increasingly popular and some evidence suggests that being vegetarian may be associated with a lower risk of cancer overall. However, for specific cancer sites, the evidence is limited. Our aim was to assess the associations of vegetarian and non-vegetarian diets with risks of all cancer, colorectal cancer, postmenopausal breast cancer, and prostate cancer and to explore the role of potential mediators between these associations.MethodsWe conducted a prospective analysis of 472,377 UK Biobank participants who were free from cancer at recruitment. Participants were categorised into regular meat-eaters (n = 247,571), low meat-eaters (n = 205,385), fish-eaters (n = 10,696), and vegetarians (n = 8685) based on dietary questions completed at recruitment. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regressions were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all cancer incidence and separate cancer sites across diet groups.ResultsAfter an average follow-up of 11.4 years, 54,961 incident cancers were identified, including 5882 colorectal, 7537 postmenopausal breast, and 9501 prostate cancers. Compared with regular meat-eaters, being a low meat-eater, fish-eater, or vegetarian were all associated with a lower risk of all cancer (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96-1.00; 0.90, 0.84-0.96; 0.86, 0.80-0.93, respectively). Being a low meat-eater was associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer in comparison to regular meat-eaters (0.91, 0.86-0.96); however, there was heterogeneity in this association by sex (p = 0.007), with an inverse association across diet groups in men, but not in women. Vegetarian postmenopausal women had a lower risk of breast cancer (0.82, 0.68-0.99), which was attenuated and non-significant after adjusting for body mass index (BMI; 0.87, 0.72-1.05); in mediation analyses, BMI was found to possibly mediate the observed association. In men, being a fish-eater or a vegetarian was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer (0.80, 0.65-0.99 and 0.69, 0.54-0.89, respectively).ConclusionThe lower risk of colorectal cancer in low meat-eaters is consistent with previous evidence suggesting an adverse impact of meat intake. The lower risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in vegetarian women may be explained by their lower BMI. It is not clear whether the other differences observed for all cancers and for prostate cancer reflect any causal relationships or are due to other factors such as residual confounding or differences in cancer detection.

Project description:There is a growing trend for vegetarian and vegan diets in many Western countries. Epidemiological evidence suggesting that such diets may help in maintaining good health is rising. However, dietary and sociodemographic characteristics of vegetarians and vegans are not well known. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to describe sociodemographic and nutritional characteristics of self-reported, adult vegetarians and vegans, compared to meat-eaters, from the French NutriNet-Santé study. Participants were asked if they were following a specific diet. They were then classified into three self-reported diet groups: 90,664 meat-eaters, 2370 vegetarians, and 789 vegans. Dietary data were collected using three repeated 24-h dietary records. Multivariable polytomic logistic regression models were perfomed to assess the association between the sociodemographic characteristics and type of diet. The prevalence of nutrient intake inadequacy was estimated, by sex and age for micronutrients, as well as by type of self-reported diet. Compared with meat-eaters, vegetarians were more likely to have a higher educational level, whereas vegans had a lower education level. Compared with meat-eaters, vegetarians were more likely to be women, younger individuals, and to be self-employed or never employed rather than managerial staff. Vegetarians and vegans substituted animal protein-dense products with a higher consumption of plant protein-dense products (e.g., soy-based products or legumes). Vegetarians had the most balanced diets in terms of macronutrients, but also had a better adherence to French dietary guidelines. Vegetarians exhibited a lower estimated prevalence of inadequacies for micronutrients such as antioxidant vitamins (e.g., for vitamin E, 28.9% for vegetarian women <55 years of age vs. 41.6% in meat-eaters) while vegans exhibited a higher estimated prevalence of inadequacies for some nutrients, in particular vitamin B12 (69.9% in men and 83.4% in women <55 years of age), compared to meat-eaters. Our study highlighted that, overall, self-reported vegetarians and vegans may meet nutritional recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundMeat-free diets may be associated with a higher risk of hip fracture, but prospective evidence is limited. We aimed to investigate the risk of hip fracture in occasional meat-eaters, pescatarians, and vegetarians compared to regular meat-eaters in the UK Biobank, and to explore the role of potential mediators of any observed risk differences.MethodsMiddle-aged UK adults were classified as regular meat-eaters (n = 258,765), occasional meat-eaters (n = 137,954), pescatarians (n = 9557), or vegetarians (n = 7638) based on dietary and lifestyle information at recruitment (2006-2010). Incident hip fractures were identified by record linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics up to September 2021. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate associations between each diet group and hip fracture risk, with regular meat-eaters as the reference group, over a median follow-up time of 12.5 years.ResultsAmong 413,914 women, 3503 hip fractures were observed. After adjustment for confounders, vegetarians (HR (95% CI): 1.50 (1.18, 1.91)) but not occasional meat-eaters (0.99 (0.93, 1.07)) or pescatarians (1.08 (0.86, 1.35)) had a greater risk of hip fracture than regular meat-eaters. This is equivalent to an adjusted absolute risk difference of 3.2 (1.2, 5.8) more hip fractures per 1000 people over 10 years in vegetarians. There was limited evidence of effect modification by BMI on hip fracture risk across diet groups (pinteraction = 0.08), and no clear evidence of effect modification by age or sex (pinteraction = 0.9 and 0.3, respectively). Mediation analyses suggest that BMI explained 28% of the observed risk difference between vegetarians and regular meat-eaters (95% CI: 1.1%, 69.8%).DiscussionVegetarian men and women had a higher risk of hip fracture than regular meat-eaters, and this was partly explained by their lower BMI. Ensuring adequate nutrient intake and weight management are therefore particularly important in vegetarians in the context of hip fracture prevention.Trial registrationNCT05554549, registered retrospectively.

Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of people adhere to plant-based diets, and the market for plant-based meat and dairy substitute products has been expanding rapidly.ObjectiveTo examine total intake of macronutrients and salt in a sample of Norwegian vegans, vegetarians and pescatarians; the consumption frequency of plant-based meat and dairy substitutes and raw ingredients used in these products; and the contribution to total macronutrient and salt intake from these products.DesignA cross-sectional design using single 24-h dietary recall to assess the intake of macronutrients, salt and substitute products that the participants (n = 158 Norway residents [age 18-60 years]: vegans [n = 83]; vegetarians [n = 47]; pescatarians [n = 28]) consumed. The chi-square test with pairwise comparisons and the Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc test were used to compare differences between diet groups. Macronutrient and salt intake were assessed relative to the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations (NNR).ResultsDietary macronutrient intake fell within NNR recommendations, with a favourable distribution of fatty acids and high levels of dietary fibre. Most of the vegans (90%), vegetarians (68%) and pescatarians (64%) consumed meat or dairy substitutes. The main raw ingredient in the substitute products was soy, followed by oats and peas. Overall, substitute products contributed to 12% of total energy and 16% of total salt intake. The substitute products contributed to higher saturated fatty acid (SFA) intake amongst vegans (27% of total SFA intake) compared with vegetarians (10%) and pescatarians (8%). Moreover, substitute products contributed to higher protein intake in vegans (19%) compared with pescatarians (7%).ConclusionMost participants consumed meat or dairy substitute products, suggesting that these products are included regularly in Norwegian plant-based diets. Furthermore, substitute products may contribute to dietary fat, SFA and protein intake amongst vegans.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the associations of vegetarianism with risks of ischaemic heart disease and stroke.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingThe EPIC-Oxford study, a cohort in the United Kingdom with a large proportion of non-meat eaters, recruited across the country between 1993 and 2001.Participants48 188 participants with no history of ischaemic heart disease, stroke, or angina (or cardiovascular disease) were classified into three distinct diet groups: meat eaters (participants who consumed meat, regardless of whether they consumed fish, dairy, or eggs; n=24 428), fish eaters (consumed fish but no meat; n=7506), and vegetarians including vegans (n=16 254), based on dietary information collected at baseline, and subsequently around 2010 (n=28 364).Main outcome measuresIncident cases of ischaemic heart disease and stroke (including ischaemic and haemorrhagic types) identified through record linkage until 2016.ResultsOver 18.1 years of follow-up, 2820 cases of ischaemic heart disease and 1072 cases of total stroke (519 ischaemic stroke and 300 haemorrhagic stroke) were recorded. After adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle confounders, fish eaters and vegetarians had 13% (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.99) and 22% (0.78, 0.70 to 0.87) lower rates of ischaemic heart disease than meat eaters, respectively (P<0.001 for heterogeneity). This difference was equivalent to 10 fewer cases of ischaemic heart disease (95% confidence interval 6.7 to 13.1 fewer) in vegetarians than in meat eaters per 1000 population over 10 years. The associations for ischaemic heart disease were partly attenuated after adjustment for self reported high blood cholesterol, high blood pressure, diabetes, and body mass index (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.00 in vegetarians with all adjustments). By contrast, vegetarians had 20% higher rates of total stroke (hazard ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.40) than meat eaters, equivalent to three more cases of total stroke (95% confidence interval 0.8 to 5.4 more) per 1000 population over 10 years, mostly due to a higher rate of haemorrhagic stroke. The associations for stroke did not attenuate after further adjustment of disease risk factors.ConclusionsIn this prospective cohort in the UK, fish eaters and vegetarians had lower rates of ischaemic heart disease than meat eaters, although vegetarians had higher rates of haemorrhagic and total stroke.

Dataset Information

Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts.

Publications

Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets