ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Diet for Human and Planetary Health: Why We Should Consider Limiting Meat?
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Carnivore Diet: A Scoping Review of the Current Evidence, Potential Benefits and Risks.Nutrients · 2026Review
- From subsistence to nutritional well-being: the role of non-agricultural employment in enhancing the dietary consumption patterns of rural residents in China.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- When Sustainability Meets Innovation: A Cross-Country Study on Dairy Consumer Choices in Poland, Germany, and Czechia.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Climate change is currently the most significant threat to public health, and human activities are the major contributing factor. There is an urgent need to prioritize mitigation strategies at both personal and public policy levels. There is a general lack of belief that changes at a personal level would have a significant effect. However, it is vital to recognize the importance of food consumption on one's personal footprint and how it can be used as a key feature in mitigation efforts. The Center for Sustainable Systems at the University of Michigan projects that reducing meat consumption per individual by 50% reduces an individual's carbon footprint by 35% per day and reducing by 90% cuts an individual's carbon footprint by 51% per day. Additionally, high meat consumption has been associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and colorectal cancer. In contrast, plant-based diets are linked to better health outcomes and lower mortality rates. This article is a narrative review and reviews current evidence on the health and environmental impacts of meat-based diets and highlights the potential benefits of plant-forward dietary patterns. These findings support the integration of dietary recommendations into climate and public health strategies. Promoting plant-based diets through clinical guidance and policy initiatives may offer a cost-effective, scalable approach to advancing both population health and environmental sustainability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.