Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods
Clark MA, Springmann M, Hill J, Tilman D
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 397 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Government
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
- University or hospital
- University of Minnesota
- Nonprofit
- Wellcome Trust
- Grants
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (MN-12-083); Wellcome Trust (205212); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (R835873); Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z)
Based on 4 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2019-10-28 · Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A · vol. 116 · issue 46 · pp. 23357–23362
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Cited
- 885 citations · more than 100% of similar papers · 53.6× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 53 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Keywords
- Environmental degradation, Sustainability, Environmental health, Sustainable development, Environmental planning, Climate change, Environmental resource management, Business, Geography, Natural resource economics, Environmental science, Medicine, Economics, Ecology, Biology
- MeSH
- humans, chronic disease, diet, mortality, conservation of natural resources, food
4 authors
From US, GB
- Michael ClarkUniversity of Minnesota; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; University of Oxford
- Marco SpringmannUniversity of Oxford
- Jason HillUniversity of Minnesota
- David TilmanUniversity of Minnesota; University of California, Santa Barbara
Abstract
Food choices are shifting globally in ways that are negatively affecting both human health and the environment. Here we consider how consuming an additional serving per day of each of 15 foods is associated with 5 health outcomes in adults and 5 aspects of agriculturally driven environmental degradation. We find that while there is substantial variation in the health outcomes of different foods, foods associated with a larger reduction in disease risk for one health outcome are often associated with larger reductions in disease risk for other health outcomes. Likewise, foods with lower impacts on one metric of environmental harm tend to have lower impacts on others. Additionally, of the foods associated with improved health (whole grain cereals, fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, olive oil, and fish), all except fish have among the lowest environmental impacts, and fish has markedly lower impacts than red meats and processed meats. Foods associated with the largest negative environmental impacts-unprocessed and processed red meat-are consistently associated with the largest increases in disease risk. Thus, dietary transitions toward greater consumption of healthier foods would generally improve environmental sustainability, although processed foods high in sugars harm health but can have relatively low environmental impacts. These findings could help consumers, policy makers, and food companies to better understand the multiple health and environmental implications of food choices.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.