Health & Wellness
Dozens of experts were asked to look into the science behind claims that meat eating causes disease and is harmful for the planet in a special issue of Animal Frontiers.
They warned that it is difficult to replace the nutritional content of meat, arguing that poorer communities with low meat intake often suffer from stunting, wasting and anaemia driven by a lack of vital nutrients and protein.
In recent years, there has been a widespread societal push towards plant-based diets, with schemes such as Veganuary and meat-free Mondays encouraging the public away from meat.
The major Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factor Study, published in The Lancet in 2020, also suggested that a diet high in red meat was responsible for 896,000 deaths worldwide, and was the fifth leading dietary risk factor.
But researchers argue that unprocessed meat delivers most of the vitamin B12 intake in human diets, plays a major role in supplying retinol, omega-3 fatty acids and minerals such as iron and zinc, as well as important compounds for metabolism, such as taurine and creatine.
'Fatally scientifically flawed'
In one paper published in the issue, experts found no good evidence to support red meat being dangerous below intakes of 75g per day, and argued that the link between red meat and disease vanished when part of a healthy diet, suggesting it was the rest of the diet that was fuelling health problems.
Dr Alice Stanton, of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, one of the authors of the review, said: "The peer-reviewed evidence published reaffirms that [the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Risk Factors Report] which claimed that consumption of even tiny amounts of red meat harms health is fatally scientifically flawed.
"In fact, removing fresh meat and dairy from diets would harm human health. Women, children, the elderly and low income would be particularly negatively impacted."
The NHS also advises that red meat - such as beef, lamb and pork - is a good source of protein, vitamins and minerals and can form part of a balanced diet, although it warns that eating more than 90g per day can raise the risk of bowel cancer.
The new edition includes a declaration signed by nearly 1,000 scientists across the globe arguing that livestock farming was too important to society to "become the victim of zealotry".
The Dublin Declaration includes signatories from the universities of Cambridge, Edinburgh, Bristol, Belfast, Newcastle, Nottingham, Surrey as well as several scientists from Britain's world-leading agricultural and farming university Harper Adams.
"Livestock-derived foods provide a variety of essential nutrients and other health-promoting compounds, many of which are lacking in diets even among those populations with higher incomes," the declaration states.
"Well-resourced individuals may be able to achieve adequate diets while heavily restricting meat, dairy and eggs. However, this approach should not be recommended for general populations."
The researchers warned that those who need to eat animal products included young children, adolescents, pregnant and lactating women, women of reproductive age, older adults and the chronically ill.
'One-size-fits-all agendas'
Dr Wilhelm Windisch, a farming nutrition expert at the Technical University of Munich, said: "Farmed and herded animals maintain a circular flow of materials in agriculture by using and upcycling large amounts of materials humans cannot eat, turning them into high-quality nutrient dense food.
"One-size-fits-all agendas, such as the drastic reductions of livestock numbers could incur environmental and nutritional consequences on a massive scale."
The intervention was welcomed by the National Farmers Union (NFU) who were this week promoting Great British Beef Week.
Richard Findlay, the NFU livestock board chair, said: "This peer-reviewed research confirms what we've always known - that red meat is a quality, nutritious protein that plays a critical role in a healthy, sustainable balanced diet.
"During Great British Beef Week this week, we can celebrate the sustainability of British beef and the environmental benefits our grazing herds deliver."
The Global Burden of Diseases team had not responded at the time of publication.
Reader Comments
Meat is crucial for human health, scientists have warned, as they called for an end to the "zealotry" pushing vegetarian and vegan diets.Do you really need a team of scientists to enlighten you to something so obvious?
Duh ya think ?
Beyond Meat is beyond Reductio ab absurdum. Fad-Veganism is self imposed cognitive decline & atrophy via ignorance. Yet they will argue otherwise to their deaths.
Trust the Zcience.
Why doesn't this mockingbird Telegraph author gives us the link to the review? I tried to find it in Google Scholar using Alice Stanton, whose research does not promote meat, and I found no review.
If you look for "meat and health" you get articles like "Two Birds, One Stone: The Effectiveness of Health and Environmental Messages to Reduce Meat Consumption and Encourage Pro-environmental Behavioral Spillover". What is that? The narrative.
Continuing to destroy domestic farmers for the sake of multinational "food" corporations that push the vegan agenda ran in a solid obstacle - the Western oil & gas embargo and ongoing collapse of cheap worldwide transport. At least in the West, fruits anf veggies from around the world are becoming unaffordable.
Nothing within the mainstream media happens without approval of their masters. And I think the British "elite" fears to be tarred and feathered by starving peasants. (Or was that an American thing ...? :O)
Meat is crucial for human health, scientists warnSame scientists who recommend we need to eat bugs, fake meat and whatever else they can think of.
Now that they caught a whole bunch of fishes with trust the science, trust the science, seems like there is a big push by the science to push more BS narratives.
Pro-vegan research tends to be funded by globalist institutions like the UN and the WEF, which have made clear that they want meat to become a "rare treat" rather than a dietary staple.
Who’d think UN - WEF would be behind that. Lol 🤡💩🎪
You vill eat see bugzzzzzzzz 🕷️🐜🦗🪲🐛
Them canines ain’t for cucumbers.
[Link] 9 Reasons Your Canine Teeth Don’t Make You a Meat-Eater
S ooner or later he will arrive at the same conclusion as all his other fellow (ex-)vegans : nature trumps ideology, every single time.
Although in some cases I bet it is a genuine faith in the propaganda.
Although in some cases I bet it is a genuine faith in the propaganda.I would say in most cases.
It doesn't take long until the brain fog sets in, and the brain itself begins to shrink (no joke !). The get tired, hangry (sic!) and depressed all the time, and can't concentrate for mor than a few minutes. All caused by the chronic lack of saturated fat, which nurtures the brain and neural cells. The worse they get, the less they are capable of self-reflection. A vicious cycle which most vegans can only break out when they hit rock-bottom. Which is a near-death experience in hospital for quite a few of them...
A self imposed, perpetually worsening immune system under the guise of health.
So veganism is actually just an organic jab. Maybe that’s where they got the idea for edible vaccines in lettuces and such.
You know when your propaganda is a real success? As in healthcare etc?
It’s when you can get the victim to gaslight themselves under the guise of health.
Or research the standard vegan stance on children. Revealing ...
Very first blurb;
Ethical vegans and vegetarians believe that it is seriously immoral to bring into existence animals whose lives would be miserable. In this paper, I will discuss whether such a belief also leads to the conclusion that it is seriously immoral to bring human beings into existence. I will argue that vegans should abstain from having children since they believe that unnecessary suffering should be ...
I saw eneough there to confirm my suspicions
But in this case I tend to agree if it were even possible but for totally different reasons. That’s a severe form of child cruelty not much different to sex abuse in my eyes. Both repugnant. Veganism is a death sentence.
The same thing as with the clot shots.
The same folks that talked for decades about a required reduction of an alleged "overpopulation" are suddenly becoming our vaxx-producing saviors during the plandemic.
They've also shown the 'difference' between a vegetarian WITHOUT low-grade chronic inflammation, and a meat eater WITH low-grade chronic inflammation, is, the increased hemoglobin and increased hematocrit / increased red blood cells.
The meat eaters have higher red blood cells.
“Protein intake from only haem animal origin was associated with increased haemoglobin and haematocrit levels whereas protein intakes from plants were not associated”
“low-grade chronic inflammation”
Low grade chronic inflammation, is bad.
R ed blood cells are by no means a marker of "low grade inflammation". Though there is a term for a chronic lack of those, called anemia. I wonder why so many vegans are suffering from it.
Correlation is not causation. Shark attacks are highly correlated with icecream sales. And swimming pool drownings are highly correlated with movie releases starring Nicolas Cage.
And so what ?
This wouldn't be a red herring perchance
Comment: See also: