Kate Kelland, Alternet.org
July 2016
The study found that in Britain, a 30 percent lower intake of animal-source saturated fat by adults would reduce the number of premature deaths from heart disease by some 17 percent -- equivalent to 18,000 premature deaths averted in one year.
Cutting meat production and consumption by 30 percent would help to
reduce carbon emissions and improve health in the most meat-loving nations,
scientists said on Wednesday.
Using prediction models, British and Australian researchers found that
improving efficiency, increasing carbon capture and reducing fossil fuel
dependence in farming would not be enough to meet emissions targets.
But combining these steps with a 30 percent reduction in livestock
production in major meat-producing nations and a similar cut in meat-eating,
would lead to "substantial population health benefits" and cut emissions,
they said.
The study found that in Britain, a 30 percent lower intake of animal-source
saturated fat by adults would reduce the number of premature deaths from
heart disease by some 17 percent -- equivalent to 18,000 premature deaths
averted in one year.
In Sao Paulo, Brazil, it could mean as many as 1,000 premature deaths
averted in a year, they said.
According to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation, 18
percent of all greenhouse gas emissions are from meat production and experts
say rising demand for meat, particularly in countries with growing
economies, could drive livestock production up by 85 percent from 2000
levels by 2030.
The scientists said global action was needed to maximise the benefits of
cutting meat production and consumption, and that the environmental
advantages "may apply only in those countries that currently have high
production levels."
The study was published in The Lancet medical journal as part of a series in
climate change and health ahead of the Copenhagen global climate summit
scheduled next month.
In a second study, British scientists found that increased walking and
cycling, and fewer cars, would have a much greater impact on health than
low-emission vehicles in rich and middle-income countries.
Andrew Haines, director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine and head of the research series, said delegates at Copenhagen
needed "to understand the potential health impacts of their plans."
Return to Environmental Articles