Meat Consumption and Availability for Its Reduction by Health and Environmental Concerns: A Pilot Study.

Andrea Turnes, Paula Pereira, Helena Cid, Ana Valente
Author Information
  1. Andrea Turnes: ATLANTIC-University Institute, 2730-036 Barcarena, Portugal.
  2. Paula Pereira: Egas Moniz Interdisciplinary Research Center, Egas Moniz School of Health and Science, Quinta da Granja-Campus Universitário, 2829-511 Monte da Caparica, Portugal. ORCID
  3. Helena Cid: HeartGenetics, Genetics & Biotechnology, Av. Prof. Gama Pinto n°. 2, 1649-003 Lisbon, Portugal.
  4. Ana Valente: ATLANTIC-University Institute, 2730-036 Barcarena, Portugal. ORCID

Abstract

(1) Background: Excessive meat consumption has raised multiple health and environmental concerns; however, there are no data on the population's willingness to reduce its intake for these reasons. The current study aims to assess the frequency of meat intake and readiness to limit consumption due to concern about the impact on health and the environment in residents of the Lisbon metropolitan region. (2) Methods: This analytical cross-sectional observational study was carried out in 197 residents in the metropolitan region of Lisbon. The participants were divided into two groups by age (GI: 20-29 years; GII: 40-64 years). Meat consumption and willingness to reduce it were assessed through a questionnaire. (3) Results: Most participants (67%) reported not having knowledge about the ecological footprint of meat. Being a less frequent meat consumer (<1 time per day) is associated with a willingness 3.6 times higher ( < 0.001) to reduce meat consumption due to sensitivity to the impact on health and 4.0 times higher ( < 0.001) due to environmental reasons. (4) Conclusions: Lower meat consumption frequency was associated with reductions in this consumption for environmental and health reasons.

Keywords

References

  1. Nutrients. 2017 Sep 15;9(9): [PMID: 28926931]
  2. Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jul;21(10):1835-1844 [PMID: 29576031]
  3. Meat Sci. 2022 Feb;184:108695 [PMID: 34695682]
  4. Appetite. 2022 Mar 1;170:105880 [PMID: 34942285]
  5. Lancet. 2010 Oct 9;376(9748):1261-71 [PMID: 20933263]
  6. Front Nutr. 2022 Nov 10;9:1016858 [PMID: 36438730]
  7. BMC Med. 2021 Mar 2;19(1):53 [PMID: 33648505]
  8. Rev Saude Publica. 2009 Nov;43 Suppl 2:38-47 [PMID: 19936497]
  9. Food Res Int. 2020 Nov;137:109341 [PMID: 33233049]
  10. Porto Biomed J. 2018 Sep 05;3(3):e25 [PMID: 31595251]
  11. Nutr Rev. 2017 Jan;75(1):2-17 [PMID: 27974596]
  12. J Community Health. 2015 Oct;40(5):948-55 [PMID: 25822317]
  13. Rev Sci Tech. 2018 Apr;37(1):47-55 [PMID: 30209430]
  14. Foods. 2022 Jul 12;11(14): [PMID: 35885304]
  15. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar 19;18(6): [PMID: 33808637]

MeSH Term

Humans
Young Adult
Adult
Pilot Projects
Cross-Sectional Studies
Meat
Surveys and Questionnaires
Consumer Behavior

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0meatconsumptionhealthenvironmentalwillingnessreducereasonsdue0intakestudyfrequencyimpactenvironmentresidentsLisbonmetropolitanregionparticipantsyearsMeat3ecologicalfootprintassociatedtimeshigher<00141Background:Excessiveraisedmultipleconcernshoweverdatapopulation'scurrentaimsassessreadinesslimitconcern2Methods:analyticalcross-sectionalobservationalcarried197dividedtwogroupsageGI:20-29GII:40-64assessedquestionnaireResults:67%reportedknowledgelessfrequentconsumer<1timeperday6sensitivityConclusions:LowerreductionsConsumptionAvailabilityReductionHealthEnvironmentalConcerns:PilotStudy

Similar Articles

Cited By (1)