Any "planetary diet" must also work for the poorest and most vulnerable

In the last two years, 37 experts from around the world have struggled to develop a sustainable and healthy diet. They have integrated existing knowledge about the impact of the diet on diseases, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer, with the impact of current food production systems on the environment.

The result of this "EAT-Lancet Commission" is a founding report, published Jan. 16, on "Food in the Anthropocene". The scheme they proposed is likely to divide opinion because it would have a fundamental impact on the daily lives of many people. By comparing it to what is generally consumed in the UK, for example, dramatic changes are recommended.

What made the headlines was the reduction in the consumption of red meat (beef, pork and lamb), which went from about 12% of total energy intake to only 1 %. Poultry is doing a little better, but it is still falling by more than half, along with a significant reduction in the consumption of fish, eggs and dairy products. The potential impact of diets in North America (the largest consumers of meat and dairy products) is even greater.

These animal products must be replaced in large part by nuts, legumes and legumes. While total cereal intake (wheat, rice and maize) remains largely unchanged, refined products must be replaced by whole varieties.

With fresh veganism in mind, such changes may not seem too radical. However, even though social media makes us believe that vegetarianism, or even veganism, is the norm, only 12% of the British population is on a meatless diet.

A healthier diet – for whom?

There is little doubt that eating less red meat is good for your health, but it is also important to recognize that for the poorest in society, meat and dairy products are affordable sources of calories and many trace elements. In areas of the world where malnutrition is still prevalent, increasing the availability of such products would certainly have important health benefits.

People around the world are yearning for the meat and dairy-rich diets that dominate most high-income countries. This is especially the case in China, where traditional diets, rich in rice and other vegetable matter, are rapidly being replaced by meat dishes. The country now has more than 400 million pigs, about half of the world's population. Changing these mindsets and ensuring that the most vulnerable people continue to feed themselves appropriately is at least as challenging as manipulating agricultural production around the world.

Animal production is often perceived as an unsustainable use of natural resources. Many animals are fed with food that is suitable for human consumption, consume a large part of the planet's water resources, and then produce methane, one of the most powerful greenhouse gases. It is hard to argue that higher-income countries should not reduce their meat and dairy products.

However, other animals (including cows, sheep and goats) graze on pasture unsuitable for growing edible plants, turning the grbad and other plants into valuable proteins. . If the United Kingdom, for example, abandoned such animal production, would its inhabitants really be ready to see radical changes in a rural environment badociated with its "green and pleasant land"? Could the highlands of Scotland, Wales and the North of England really turn to peanut and soybean production?

No more as usual

The EAT-Lancet report can not be ignored. It clearly highlights the catastrophic consequences for the planet of the pursuit of the "status quo". However, it is important that as agriculture becomes more efficient and sustainable, we always consider the health and well-being of the most vulnerable in society. This includes not only the one billion people who remain under threat of malnutrition in areas such as sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, but also many of the poorest people in the large urban conglomerates of our affluent countries.

When it is adopted, the report suggests that recommended dietary changes could save more than 11 million lives each year. Although most would like a longer and healthier life, this represents more mouths to feed in an aging population. As people get older, their nutritional needs change and about a third of people living in retirement homes in the UK suffer from some malnutrition. Ironically, this is often badociated with a lack of high quality protein, such as in meat and dairy products. This raises perhaps even deeper questions about what we wish to achieve for the future of mankind.