Latest news with #Gebara
Business Mayor
28-04-2025
- Health
- Business Mayor
This is how much meat you can eat without damaging the planet
Sign up for our free Health Check email to receive exclusive analysis on the week in health Get our free Health Check email Meat consumption equivalent to less than two chicken breast fillets per week can be considered sustainable for the planet, a new study estimates. Researchers have been calling for reducing meat consumption and increasing legume intake to meet one's protein needs for years now as livestock is estimated to be responsible for nearly 15 per cent of the global greenhouse gas emissions. They have been urging people to adopt a plant-based 'flexitarian' diet in which meat is eaten less than once a week. But how exactly much meat consumption is recommended weekly has remained unclear. 'Most people now realise that we should eat less meat for both environmental and health reasons. But it is hard to relate to how much 'less' is and whether it really makes a difference in the big picture,' said Caroline Gebara, an expert in sustainable development from the Technical University of Denmark. The latest study, published in the journal Nature Food, puts this number at about 255 grams, or 9 ounces, of meat per week. 'We have calculated a concrete figure – 255 grams of poultry or pork a week – which you can actually visualise and consider when you are standing in the supermarket,' Dr Gebara said. This is equivalent to about two chicken breast fillets, the limit of meat one person can consume weekly without harming the planet. Trays of beef for sale in a supermarket in McLean, Virginia, US (AFP via Getty) The figure applies only to poultry and pork. The study warns that even a 'modest consumption' of beef exceeds what the planet can sustain. 'Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study,' Dr Gebara said. 'However, there are many other diets, including ones with meat, that are both healthy and sustainable.' The study calls for better political guidance and public frameworks to support sustainable food choices. The study considers environmental factors like carbon dioxide emissions, water and land use as well as the health impact of different diets. It examines over 100,000 variations of 11 types of diets and calculates their respective environmental and health effects. It concludes that even moderate amounts of red meat exceeded planetary sustainability limits. A pescetarian, vegetarian or vegan diet, on the other hand, is much more likely to be within the limits of what the planet can support, the study says. Mixed diets such as vegetarian, but with the addition of dairy or eggs, can also be sustainable. 'For example, our calculations show that it is possible to eat cheese if that is important to you, while at the same time having a healthy and climate-friendly diet,' Dr Gebara said. 'The same is true for eggs, fish, and white meat but the premise is of course, that the rest of your diet is then relatively healthy and sustainable. But it doesn't have to be either-or.'
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Scientists Calculated How Much Meat You Can Sustainably Eat in a Week
When it comes to eating meat, it sometimes seems impossible to strike a balance between doing the right thing for your body, and for the planet. Now, a team of environmental scientists has calculated a sweet spot that we can actually write on our shopping lists. "Most people now realize that we should eat less meat for both environmental and health reasons. But it's hard to relate to how much 'less' is and whether it really makes a difference in the big picture," says lead author Caroline Gebara, an environmental scientist at the Technical University of Denmark. That's why she and her team calculated a tangible figure – 255 grams (9 ounces) of poultry or pork per week – that people can factor into stocking their fridges. That's roughly two chicken breasts. It's also six to ten times less meat than the average US or European citizen ate in 2021. And the study suggests red meat – especially beef – cannot be part of an environmentally sustainable diet. That's probably because a lot of land must be cleared to farm animals like cows and sheep, which then emit methane (a greenhouse gas 28 times more potent than CO2) and nitrous oxide (270 times more potent than CO2) through their waste and feed crops. "Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study," Gebara says. "However, there are many other diets – including ones with meat – that are both healthy and sustainable." Humans have been eating animals and their byproducts for at least 2.6 million years, and we're not going to stop any time soon. But our hunger for meat is, to put it lightly, a bit out of control. The environmental footprint of our livestock comes largely from greenhouse gases emitted directly by the animals, damage to the land used to raise them, and the fuel burned in transporting them, turning them into meat, and getting that meat to our plates. One study estimated that greenhouse gases could stabilize for 30 years if animal agriculture, as it exists today, was rapidly phased out. That's an unlikely scenario, but it gives a sense of the industry's impact on our world. With all that in mind, Gebara and her team conducted literature reviews to identify constraints for both healthy diets – resulting in 32 key nutritional requirements – and ones which are environmentally sustainable – based on a number of key thresholds for planetary sustainability. All this came together to form a model that identified the amounts of different kinds of foods an individual could eat, per week, without putting undue strain on the planet's resources. "For example, our calculations show that it's possible to eat cheese if that is important to you, while at the same time having a healthy and climate-friendly diet," Gebara says. "The same is true for eggs, fish, and white meat, but the premise is of course that the rest of your diet is then relatively healthy and sustainable. But it doesn't have to be either-or." Models like this can really oversimplify different people's dietary needs and personal circumstances, which the authors acknowledge. The food characteristics used for the nutritional aspects of this study are based on US data, so they're more of a proxy for high-income countries than globally representative. It's also difficult to capture all the many and varied impacts that food systems have across the world in a study like this. The model also relies on impacts of food production across one year remaining consistent, which is not the case in the real world. Technologies can change environmental impacts of certain foods, so this model will need to be updated over time. "Our study focused on the biophysical limits of human nutrient intake and environmental impacts, but overlooked other aspects such as accessibility, affordability, and cultural acceptance," the authors write. "Achieving truly sustainable diets requires universal availability, which must be supported by policymakers at all levels." This research was published in Nature Food. 'Game Changer': Hot New Tech Turns Forever Chemicals Into Valuable Resource 'Bad Omen': Ancient Pyramid in Mexico Collapsed Into A Pile of Rubble Pet Dogs Are Great For Our Health But They Have a Dark Side Too
Business Mayor
23-04-2025
- Health
- Business Mayor
Woke scientists claim you should only eat two chicken breasts a WEEK to save the planet
While many of us try out best to limit our meat consumption, the temptation of a juicy burger or a succulent rack of ribs can be too much to resist. Now, a study reveals just how little meat you should be consuming if you truly want to have a sustainable diet. According to experts from the Technical University of Denmark, you can only eat 255g of chicken or pork a week without harming the planet. That's the equivalent of just two chicken breasts or one pork chop across the entire week. It's also bad news for fans of beef, veal, lamb or venison. Red meat is off the cards entirely if you want to stick within planetary boundaries, the experts say. 'Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study,' said Caroline H. Gebara, lead author of the study. 'However, there are many other diets—including ones with meat—that are both healthy and sustainable.' According to experts from the Technical University of Denmark, you can only eat 255g of chicken or pork a week without harming the planet. That's the equivalent of just two chicken breasts or one pork chop across the entire week (stock image) In the study, the team set out to understand exactly how much meat you can include in your diet without harming the planet. 'Most people now realize that we should eat less meat for both environmental and health reasons,' saiid Ms Gebara. Read More Moon-bound Vulcan rocket successfully launches into space – video 'But it's hard to relate to how much 'less' is and whether it really makes a difference in the big picture.' The team's calculations took into account a range of environmental factors. This inculded carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the consumption of water, and land use. They also looked at the environmental and health benefits of more than 100,000 variations of 11 popular diets. Unfortunately for meat-lovers, their calculations show that a diet with any amount of red meat exceeds planetary limits. However, they say that a small amount of poultry or pork is OK. Unfortunately for meat-lovers, their calculations show that a diet with any amount of red meat exceeds planetary limits 'Based on the planetary boundaries, we have calculated a concrete figure—255 grams of poultry or pork per week—which you can actually visualize and consider when you are standing in the supermarket,' Ms Gebara said. At most UK supermarkets, a pack of two chicken breasts typically weighs around 300g, which is slightly over the limit set out by the experts. Meanwhile, a pack of two pork chops usually weighs around 500g, which means you can treat yourself to just over one chop per week. Pescatarians, vegetarians, and vegans, on the other hand, can indulge in most of their favourite meals guilt-free, according to the calculations. 'Our calculations show that it's possible to eat cheese if that is important to you, while at the same time having a healthy and climate-friendly diet,' Ms Gebara added. 'The same is true for eggs, fish and white meat, but the premise is of course that the rest of your diet is then relatively healthy and sustainable. But it doesn't have to be either-or.' The news comes shortly after scientists from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine revealed the exact amount of money you could save by going vegan. According to their calculations, changing to a low-fat, vegan diet could save you £1.44 ($1.80) per day. Over the course of the year, that's an impressive saving of £525 ($657).
