Strategies for reducing meat consumption within college and university settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionDespite the considerable public and planetary health benefits associated with reducing the amount of meat consumed in high-income countries, there is a limited empirical understanding of how these voluntary changes in food choice can be effectively facilitated across different settings. While prior reviews have given us broad insights into the varying capacities of behavior change strategies to promote meaningful reductions in meat consumption, none have compared how they perform relative to each other within a uniform dining context.MethodsTo address this gap in the literature, we synthesized the available research on university-implemented meat reduction interventions and examined the variations in the success rates and effect estimates associated with each of the three approaches identified in our systematic review.ResultsFrom our analyses of the 31 studies that met our criteria for inclusion (n = 31), we found that most were successful in reducing the amount of meat consumed within university settings. Moreover, independent of the number of individual strategies being used, multimodal interventions were found to be more reliable and effective in facilitating these changes in food choice than interventions targeting the choice architecture of the retail environment or conscious decision-making processes alone.DiscussionIn addition to demonstrating the overall value of behavior change initiatives in advancing more sustainable dining practices on college and university campuses, this study lends further insights into the merits and mechanics underlying strategically integrated approaches to dietary change. Further investigations exploring the persistence and generalizability of these effects and intervention design principles are needed.Systematic review registrationhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DXQ5V, identifier: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DXQ5V

Balancing a sustained pursuit of nutrition, health, affordability and climate goals: exploring the case of Indonesia

Background: To guide the transformation of food systems to provide for healthy and sustainable diets, countries need to assess their current diet and food supply in comparison to nutrition, health, affordability, and environmental goals. Objectives: We sought to compare Indonesia’s food utilization to diets optimized for nutritional value and cost and to diets that are increasingly plant-based in order to meet further health and environmental goals, including the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet, to explore whether multiple goals could be achieved simultaneously. Methods: We compared 13 dietary scenarios (2 current, 7 optimized, 3 increasingly plant-based, 1 EAT-Lancet) for nutrient content, cost, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe), and water footprints, using the FAO food balance sheet, Indonesia Household Income and Expenditure Survey household food expenditure, food composition, life cycle assessment, food losses, and trade data. Results: The diversity of modeled scenarios was higher than that of current consumption, reflecting nutritional deficiencies underlying Indonesia’s burden of different forms of malnutrition. Nutrient intake targets were met best by nutrient- and cost-optimized diets, followed by the EAT-Lancet diet. Those diets also had high GHGe, although less than 40% of a scenario in which Indonesia would adopt a typical high-income country’s diet. Only the low food chain diet had a GHGe below the 2050 target set by the EAT-Lancet commission. Its nutrient content was comparable to that of a no-dairy diet, slightly above those of fish-and-poultry and current diets, and somewhat below those of the EAT-Lancet diets. To meet nutrient needs, some animal-source foods had to be included. Costs of all except the optimized diets were above the current national average food expenditure. No scenario met all goals simultaneously. Conclusions: Indonesia’s consumption of rice and unhealthy foods should decrease; food production, trade, and processing should prioritize diversification, (bio)fortification, and limiting environmental impacts; and consumer and institutional demands for healthy, nutritious, and sustainable foods should be stimulated. More granula

Barriers to healthy food access: Associations with household income and cooking behavior

To examine how barriers to healthy food access and household income are associated with cooking and eating behaviors we fielded a nationally representative survey among 1112 adults in the United States in 2015. The survey included measures of barriers to accessing healthy food, household income, and frequency of cooking and eating meals, cooking practices, and other eating behaviors. We used multivariable poisson regression to examine the association of household income and barriers to healthy food access with cooking and eating behavior outcomes. We find that low income was associated with higher barriers to accessing healthy food (barriers) and that both income and barriers were associated with differences in cooking frequency/practices, and consumption behaviors. In interaction models, cooking and eating behaviors did not vary based on barriers for the lowest income level (<$25,000). In the middle income level ($25,000–$59,000), barriers were associated with cooking breakfast (3.35 vs. 2.64 times/week, p = 0.03) and lunch (3.32 vs. 2.56 times/week, p = 0.02) more frequently compared to those who never/rarely encountered barriers. At the highest income level (≥$60,000), barriers were associated with less frequently eating breakfast (4.29 vs. 5.11 times/week, p < 0.001) and lunch (4.77 vs. 5.56, times/week, p < 0.001) compared to those who never/rarely encountered barriers. Barriers to healthy food access are related to both household income and cooking and eating behaviors important for diet quality and healthy eating. Targeted interventions to address time available to shop, and the price, selection and quality of healthy foods, are necessary

The origins and growth of the Meatless Monday movement

Meatless Monday is a global movement that encourages people to reduce meat in their diets for their own health and the health of the planet. We conducted a comprehensive review of primary and secondary sources and archival material documenting the origins, historical roots, and growth of Meatless Monday and simultaneous developments in public health. Sources for the paper included publications of the US Food Administration and articles and media identified using searches of ProQuest Historical Newspapers, Newspapers.com Academic, ProQuest US Newsstream, ProQuest Canadian Newstream, ProQuest International Newsstream databases, and Google.com. Meatless Monday was conceived by the advertising executive and public health advocate Sid Lerner in 2003, inspired by the meatless days observed during World War I and II. Meatless Monday grew steadily from 2003 to 2023 through advocacy by food writers, talk show hosts, and celebrity chefs, and through participation by schools, cities, restaurants, corporations, and institutions worldwide. School systems began to observe Meatless Monday, such as Baltimore City Public Schools in 2009 and New York City Public Schools in 2019. Meat-Free Monday campaign was launched by Paul McCartney and his daughters in 2009 in the United Kingdom. The Humane Society of the United States became an advocate for Meatless Monday and helped institute it in &gt;200 US school systems. From 2003 to 2023, Meatless Monday spread to over 40 countries and was observed in public schools in countries such as Brazil, Ireland, and Belgium. Findings regarding high meat consumption and its adverse effects on health, high greenhouse gas production and environment degradation, and problems with animal welfare under conditions of industrial food animal production emerged during the same period and influenced many to advocate Meatless Monday. Meatless days of World War I and II were driven by patriotic motivations to provide food for the US troops and the Allies in Europe, whereas motivations for observing Meatless Monday were largely related to concerns regarding personal health, the environment, and animal welfare. Meatless Monday grew from relatively humble origins to a highly recognized worldwide movement with wide appeal as a way to begin reducing meat consumption for personal and planetary health

Trends in types of protein in US adolescents and children: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010.

BackgroundIt is unclear if the intakes of different types of protein have changed over time.ObjectiveWe delineated trends in types of protein (beef, pork, lamb or goat, chicken, turkey, fish, dairy, eggs, legumes, and nuts and seeds) in US children (2-MethodsWe used 6 repeated cross-sectional surveys (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010, n≥1,665 for children; n≥1,156 for adolescents) to test for linear trends in the intake of types of protein (grams per kilogram of body weight) among children and adolescents, and according to sociodemographic groups and participation in food assistance programs.ResultsAmong children, pork intake (0.76 to 0.51 g/kg) decreased, but chicken (0.98 to 1.28 g/kg), all poultry (1.18 to 1.55 g/kg), egg (0.63 to 0.69 g/kg), and legume (0.35 to 0.54 g/kg) intake increased (all PConclusionsIntake of recommended types of protein increased among children, adolescents and WIC participants. However, subgroup analyses suggest socioeconomic disparities