Dietary guidelines are increasingly promoting plant-based diets, limits on red meat consumption, and plant-based sources of protein for health and environmental reasons(1). It is unclear how the resulting food substitutions associate with insulin resistance, a risk factor for type 2 diabetes. Here, we modelled the replacement of red and processed meat with plant-based alternatives and the estimated effect on insulin sensitivity. We included 783 participants (55% female) from the Childhood Determinants of Adult Health (CDAH) study, a population-based cohort of Australians. In adulthood, diet was assessed at three time points using food frequency questionnaires: CDAH-1 (2004–06), CDAH-2 (2009–11), and CDAH-3 (2017–19). The median follow-up duration was 13 years. The cumulative average intake of each food group was calculated to reflect habitual consumption. Insulin sensitivity (%) was estimated from fasting glucose and insulin concentrations at CDAH-3 (aged 39–49 years) using homeostasis model assessment. Applying the partition model(2), we simulated the replacement of one food group with another by including both in the model simultaneously (e.g., red meat and legumes), along with potential confounders and energy intake. The difference between parameter estimates (i.e., regression coefficients and variances) and their covariance were used to estimate the “substitution” effect. We report the simulated percentage point change in log-transformed insulin sensitivity for a 1 serve/day lower intake of one food group with a 1 serve/day higher intake of another food group. Replacing red meat with a combination of plant-based alternatives was associated with higher insulin sensitivity (β = 0·10, 95% CI 0·04–0·16). Adjustment for waist circumference attenuated this association by 61·4%. On an individual basis, replacing red meat with legumes (β = 0·12, 95% CI 0·02–0·21), nuts and seeds (β = 0·15, 95% CI 0·06–0·23), or whole grains (β = 0·11, 95% CI 0·04–0·17) was likewise associated with higher insulin sensitivity. Point estimates were similar when replacing processed meat with plant-based alternatives, but more uncertain due to wide confidence intervals. Our modelling suggests that habitually replacing red meat, and possibly processed meat, with plant-based alternatives may associate with higher insulin sensitivity, and thus, a lower risk of type 2 diabetes. Abdominal adiposity was identified as a potentially important mediator in this relationship. In relation to insulin sensitivity, our findings support the recommendation to choose plant-based sources of protein at the expense of red meat consumption.

Dietary guidelines are increasingly promoting mostly plant-based diets, limits on red meat consumption, and plant-based sources of protein for health and environmental reasons. It is unclear how the resulting food substitutions associate with insulin resistance, a risk factor for type 2 diabetes. We modelled the replacement of red and processed meat with plant-based alternatives and the estimated effect on insulin sensitivity. We included 783 participants (55 % female) from the Childhood Determinants of Adult Health study, a population-based cohort of Australians. In adulthood, diet was assessed at three time points using FFQ: 2004–2006, 2009–2011 and 2017–2019. We calculated the average daily intake of each food group in standard serves. Insulin sensitivity was estimated from fasting glucose and insulin concentrations in 2017–2019 (aged 39–49 years) using homoeostasis model assessment. Replacing red meat with a combination of plant-based alternatives was associated with higher insulin sensitivity (β = 10·5 percentage points, 95 % CI (4·1, 17·4)). Adjustment for waist circumference attenuated this association by 61·7 %. Replacing red meat with either legumes, nuts/seeds or wholegrains was likewise associated with higher insulin sensitivity. Point estimates were similar but less precise when replacing processed meat with plant-based alternatives. Our modelling suggests that regularly replacing red meat, and possibly processed meat, with plant-based alternatives may associate with higher insulin sensitivity. Further, abdominal adiposity may be an important mediator in this relationship. Our findings support advice to prioritise plant-based sources of protein at the expense of red meat consumption.

Plant-based substitutes (PBS) are seen as a convenient way to transition to a more plant-based diet, but their potential health benefits and nutritional concerns remain debated. Based on a review of the literature, it is concluded here that the primary risk of insufficient nutrient intake with PBS concerns iron and calcium, which are critical to the nutritional value of PBS. Other risks were identified but these would depend on the characteristics of the overall diet, as is the case for iodine in a diet containing no seafood or dairy, and vitamin B12 in a vegetarian/vegan diet. Conversely, the use of PBS is also expected to confer some benefits for long-term health because it would result in higher fibre intakes (in the case of meat PBS) and lower SFA intakes (but higher PUFA/MUFA intakes), but attention should be paid to a potential increase in sodium intake with PBS of meat products. In fact, a recurring finding in this review was that PBS is a very heterogeneous food category involving considerable variations in ingredient and nutrient composition, and whose design could be improved in order to foster nutritional and health benefits. The latter also depend on the animal food that is being replaced and are only deemed likely when PBS replace red meat. The fortification of PBS with key nutrients such as iron and calcium may constitute an actionable public health solution to further shift the balance in favour of PBS in the context of the current dietary transition in western countries.

Studies on the transport of deer (Cervidae), in the UK, were published > 15 years ago. A more recent study of deer transport is required to allow for assessments and improvements to the transport of farmed deer. Sixteen deer farmers participated in a survey describing their management practices related to transport. Their responses showed that most vehicles used to transport deer were designed for other livestock. Participating farmers estimated journey times to slaughter as 1–8 h, with an arithmetic mean of 4.8 (± 2.38) h. Specific concerns raised by the respondents, relating to the transport of deer, included a need for deer-specific vehicles, stop-off areas for long journeys, market locations and haulier experience. Furthermore, data were collected from two abattoirs between July 2019 and June 2020 comprising journey times, slaughter times, bruising, location of origin, vehicle type and the number of animals. In total, 4,922 deer were transported across 133 journeys (from farm to abattoir) from 61 farms. Median and range for journey length were 3.2 (0.4–9.8) h and 154.2 (7.1–462.2) km, whereas group size and time spent in the lairage were 24 (1–121) and 17.8 (10.2–68.9) h, respectively. Group size was found to be significantly associated with both the presence of bruising in a group and the amount of bruising per deer. This study provides a much-needed update on the transport of farmed deer in the UK and highlights key areas for future research including the welfare impact of transport in larger groups and for longer durations.

The ethical and economic significance of slaughtering animals for consumption by people of faith cannot be underestimated. On one hand, there are concerns for the welfare of animals during rearing, transport and slaughter, on the other, the market for halal meat products continues to grow at an exponential rate which has attracted the attention of independent and mainstream retailers. This paper considers the slaughter methods approved for the main animal species slaughtered for consumption by Muslims: beef, lamb, goats and poultry. It further examines the rationale for approving and rejecting certain methods of stunning and the implications this has for the welfare of animals. Areas where further research is needed to improve animal welfare during halal slaughter are also highlighted, and the authors have argued why a dialogue between animal welfare researchers, Islamic scholars and halal certification or accreditation bodies is vital in creating knowledge exchange between key stakeholders with a view to improving animal welfare during halal meat production.

It is commonly asserted that Chinese diets before the market and production reforms of the 1980s contained little or no meat. Yet this nearly universal assumption remains untested: Unlike other forms of material consumption, the question of meat in Chinese diets has received almost no systematic attention from historians. Focusing on the early twentieth century, this article examines who in China ate meat, and how meat consumption was shaped by regional and household patterns. It combines insights from three sorts of data. First, Japanese price surveys from the 1920s show a high degree of variation in the preference for one type of meat over others, and the price availability of meat versus wages or other food products. Second, production data, including slaughterhouse tallies and industry estimates of animal by-products show the seasonality of animal slaughter and the vast scale and dispersed geography of China’s livestock production. Finally, nutrition and diet studies from the 1920 to the late 1940s examine actual household consumption, emphasizing how social forces and cyclical fortunes shaped individual choices. The composite picture from these three perspectives confirms that China’s meat consumption was hardly inconsequential. But more than simply triangulating a result, the exercise of comparing perspectives of price, production, and nutrition also highlights the collection of survey data as a series of historical moments.

Limited data exist regarding the role of meat consumption in early-stage colorectal carcinogenesis. We examined associations of red and processed meat intake with screen-detected colorectal lesions in immunochemical fecal occult blood test (FIT)-positive participants, enrolled in the Norwegian CRCbiome study during 2017–2021, aged 55–77 years. Absolute and energy-adjusted intakes of red and processed meat (combined and individually) were assessed using a validated, semi-quantitative FFQ. Associations between meat intake and screen-detected colorectal lesions were examined using multinomial logistic regression analyses with adjustment for key covariates. Of 1162 participants, 319 presented with advanced colorectal lesions at colonoscopy. High v. low energy-adjusted intakes of red and processed meat combined, as well as red meat alone, were borderline to significantly positively associated with advanced colorectal lesions (OR of 1·24 (95 % CI 0·98, 1·57) and 1·34 (95 % CI 1·07, 1·69), respectively). A significant dose–response relationship was also observed for absolute intake levels (OR of 1·32 (95 % CI 1·09, 1·60) per 100 g/d increase in red and processed meat). For processed meat, no association was observed between energy-adjusted intakes and advanced colorectal lesions. A significant positive association was, however, observed for participants with absolute intake levels ≥ 100 v. < 50 g/d (OR of 1·19 (95 % CI 1·09, 1·31)). In summary, high intakes of red and processed meat were associated with presence of advanced colorectal lesions at colonoscopy in FIT-positive participants. The study demonstrates a potential role of dietary data to improve the performance of FIT-based screening.

Until the twentieth century there was little change in the diet of Iranians. Bread was the major staple, accompanied by vegetables, fruits, yoghurt, and nuts. Meat and rice were a luxury food for most consumers. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries new food items were adopted by Persian consumers. After 1970, the modern Iranian diet—large amounts of white rice, meats, sugar-sweetened beverages and sweet/deserts, with few vegetables, herbs, nuts or fruits—has grown increasingly similar to the US diet, with the same health problems.

The findings regarding the associations between red meat, fish and poultry consumption, and the metabolic syndrome (Mets) have been inconclusive, and evidence from Chinese populations is scarce. A cross-sectional study was performed to investigate the associations between red meat, fish and poultry consumption, and the prevalence of the Mets and its components among the residents of Suzhou Industrial Park, Suzhou, China. A total of 4424 participants were eligible for the analysis. A logistic regression model was used to estimate the OR and 95 % CI for the prevalence of the Mets and its components according to red meat, fish and poultry consumption. In addition, the data of our cross-sectional study were meta-analysed under a random effects model along with those of published observational studies to generate the summary relative risks (RR) of the associations between the highest v. lowest categories of red meat, fish and poultry consumption and the Mets and its components. In the cross-sectional study, the multivariable-adjusted OR for the highest v. lowest quartiles of consumption was 1·23 (95 % CI 1·02, 1·48) for red meat, 0·83 (95 % CI 0·72, 0·97) for fish and 0·93 (95 % CI 0·74, 1·18) for poultry. In the meta-analysis, the pooled RR for the highest v. lowest categories of consumption was 1·20 (95 % CI 1·06, 1·35) for red meat, 0·88 (95 % CI 0·81, 0·96) for fish and 0·97 (95 % CI 0·85, 1·10) for poultry. The findings of both cross-sectional studies and meta-analyses indicated that the association between fish consumption and the Mets may be partly driven by the inverse association of fish consumption with elevated TAG and reduced HDL-cholesterol and, to a lesser extent, fasting plasma glucose. No clear pattern of associations was observed between red meat or poultry consumption and the components of the Mets. The current findings add weight to the evidence that the Mets may be positively associated with red meat consumption, inversely associated with fish consumption and neutrally associated with poultry consumption.

I argue that eating meat is morally good and our duty when it is part of a practice that has benefited animals. The existence of domesticated animals depends on the practice of eating them, and the meat-eating practice benefits animals of that kind if they have good lives. The argument is not consequentialist but historical, and it does not apply to nondomesticated animals. I refine the argument and consider objections.

Associations between meat consumption and heart disease have been assessed in several studies, but it has been suggested that other dietary factors influence these associations. The aim of the present study was to assess whether meat consumption is associated with ischaemic heart disease (IHD), and if the association is modified by dietary quality. The analyses were based on the cohort of adult participants in the Danish National Survey on Diet and Physical Activity in 2000–2002, 2003–2008 and 2011–2013. From these surveys, information on meat consumption and dietary quality was extracted. The cohort was followed in national registers to identify incident IHD. Associations were estimated using Cox regression analyses adjusting for socio-demographic and lifestyle factors. Analyses of associations between meat consumption and IHD stratified by dietary quality were subsequently evaluated. Among the 8007 participants, the median follow-up was 9·8 years and 439 cases of IHD were recorded. The results suggested a trend between consumption increments of 100 g/d of red meat (hazard ratio (HR) = 1·23; 95 % CI 0·99, 1·53) or of 50 g/d of processed meat (HR = 1·09; 95 % CI 0·93, 1·29) and higher risk of IHD. The trends were, however, not statistically significant. Stratification by dietary quality did not suggest that associations between meat consumption and risk of IHD were modified by dietary quality. This population-based cohort study with detailed dietary information suggested a trend with higher meat consumption being associated with higher risk of IHD, but the association was not statistically significant. Results did not indicate that dietary quality modifies such associations.

The present study aimed to (a) establish the frequency of consumption of red meat and eggs; (b) determine serum ferritin levels (μg/l); and (c) establish the relationship between serum ferritin and the consumption of red meat and eggs. In Colombia during 2014–2018, an analytical study was conducted in 13 243 Colombian children between the ages of 5 and 17 years, based on cross-sectional data compiled by ENSIN-2015 (Encuesta Nacional de la Situación Nutricional en Colombia-2015) on serum ferritin levels and dietary consumption based on a questionnaire of the frequency of consumption. Using simple and multiple linear regression, with the serum ferritin level as the dependent variable and the frequency of consumption as the main explanatory variable, the crude and adjusted partial regression coefficients (β) between serum ferritin levels and consumption were calculated. The frequency of habitual consumption of red meat was 0⋅49 (95 % CI 0⋅47, 0⋅51) times/d. The frequency of habitual egg consumption was 0⋅76 (95 % CI 0⋅74, 0⋅78) times per d. The mean serum ferritin level in men was 41⋅9 (95 % CI 40⋅6, 43⋅1) μg/l and in women, 35⋅7 (95 % CI 34⋅3, 37⋅7) μg/l (P < 0⋅0001). The adjusted β between the consumption of red meat and eggs and serum ferritin levels were β = 3⋅0 (95 % CI 1⋅2, 4⋅7) and β = 2⋅5 (95 % CI 1⋅0, 3⋅9) for red meat and eggs, respectively. In conclusion, red meat and eggs are determinants of serum ferritin levels in Colombia and, therefore, could be considered public policy options to reduce anaemia and Fe deficiency.

The role of meat in the diet has come under scrutiny recently due to an increased public emphasis on providing healthy diets from sustainable food systems and due to health concerns relating to the consumption of red and processed meat. The present review aimed to summarise dietary guidelines relating to meat, actual meat intakes and the contribution of meat to energy and nutrient intakes of children, teenagers and adults in Europe. The available literature has shown that food-based dietary guidelines for most countries recommend consuming lean meat in moderation and many recommend limiting red and processed meat consumption. Mean intakes of total meat in Europe range from 40 to 160 g/d in children and teenagers and from 75 to 233 g/d in adults. Meat contributes to important nutrients such as protein, PUFA, B vitamins, vitamin D and essential minerals such as Fe and Zn; however, processed meat contributes to significant proportions of saturated fat and Na across population groups. While few data are available on diaggregated intakes of red and processed meat, where data are available, mean intakes in adults are higher than the upper limits recommended by the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (70 g/d) and the World Cancer Research Fund (500 g/week). While there are no recommendations for red and processed meat consumption in children and teenagers, intakes currently range from 30 to 76 g/d. The present review provides a comprehensive overview of the role of meat in the European diet which may be of use to stakeholders including researchers, policy makers and the agri-food sector.