• image.alt
  • With Mayo Clinic nutritionists

    Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.

    read biography

Mayo Clinic Health Manager

Get free personalized health guidance for you and your family.

Get Started

Free

E-Newsletter

Subscribe to receive the latest updates on health topics. About our newsletters

  • Housecall
  • Alzheimer's caregiving
  • Living with cancer
  • Nutrition-wise blog

  • July 18, 2009

    Blog: Can one change improve your health and the world's?

    By Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.

9 comments posted

Eating too much red meat and saturated fat has been shown in numerous studies to be associated with adverse health effects, such as elevations in total and low-density cholesterol levels, and increased risk for heart attack and stroke. Red meat is also a source of several cancer-causing compounds, including those formed when meat is cooked at high temperatures, and saturated fat, which is associated with increased risk of breast and colorectal cancer.

A study of meat consumption among over 500,000 Americans, published in the "Archives of Internal Medicine," found that those who ate the most red meat (about 6 ounces daily) had the highest death rate from all causes, as well as a higher risk of cancer and heart disease, than those who ate the least amount (about 1 ounce daily). The researchers calculated that 11 percent of deaths in men and 16 percent of deaths in women could be prevented if people decreased their red meat consumption to the level in the lowest intake group.

An accompanying editorial takes a more global view and points out that reducing meat consumption could improve "world health" — meaning, in this case, the health of the planet. And the United Nations has urged countries to find ways to reduce the livestock industry's impact on the environment:

  • Water supply. The amount of water used to raise animals for human consumption is two to five times the amount needed to cultivate basic food crops. In addition, livestock production contributes to erosion and contamination of the water supply with antibiotics, pesticides, nitrogen and phosphorus.
  • Climate. Livestock are responsible for about 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions — more than what is created by transportation. Deforestation to make room for pastures and feed crops also contributes to the greenhouse effect.
  • Biodiversity. Livestock and wildlife interact in many ways — both positive and negative. Livestock can help sustain open grassland ecosystems. However, expansion of grazing land and feed crops into forested areas has resulted in the irreversible loss of native plant and animal species.

I want to point out that there are major efforts underway on the part of those who raise livestock to minimize these impacts. I applaud these efforts. We need to do our part too. Cutting down on meat consumption can result in better personal health — and perhaps a healthier world too.

Thoughts?

9 comments posted

blog index
References
  1. Sinha R, et al. Meat intake and mortality: A prospective study of over half a million people. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2009;169(6):562.
  2. Popkin B. Reducing meat consumption has multiple benefits for the world's health. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2009;169(6):543.
  3. Livestock's long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/A0701E00.pdf. Accessed June 12, 2009.

MY00788

July 18, 2009

© 1998-2009 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (MFMER). All rights reserved. A single copy of these materials may be reprinted for noncommercial personal use only. "Mayo," "Mayo Clinic," "MayoClinic.com," "EmbodyHealth," "Reliable tools for healthier lives," "Enhance your life," and the triple-shield Mayo Clinic logo are trademarks of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.


Text Size: smaller largerlarger