Dataset Information

Environmental impact of Norwegian self-selected diets: comparing current intake with national dietary guidelines and EAT-Lancet targets.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Dietary environmental impact in a Norwegian adult population was estimated for six environmental impact categories. Moreover, environmental benefits of scenario diets complying with the Norwegian Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDG) and the EAT-Lancet reference diet were assessed.

Design

The current diet of Norwegian adults was estimated according to 24-h dietary recall data from a national dietary surveillance survey (Norkost 3). Scenario diets were modelled to represent the Norwegian FBDG and the EAT-Lancet healthy reference diet. Dietary environmental impact in terms of global warming potential, freshwater and marine eutrophication, terrestrial acidification, water use and transformation and use of land was estimated for the current and scenario diets using environmental impact data representative of the Norwegian market. Significant associations between impact and gender/educational attainment were assessed at P < 0·05.

Setting

Norway.

Participants

Adults (n=1787) aged 18-70 years who participated in the Norkost 3 survey (2010-2011).

Results

Environmental impact varied significantly by gender and educational attainment. The food groups contributing most to environmental impact of Norwegian diets were meat, dairy, beverages, grains and composite dishes. Compared with the current Norwegian diet, the FBDG scenario reduced impacts from 2 % (freshwater eutrophication) to 32 % (water use), while the EAT-Lancet scenario reduced impacts from 7 % (marine eutrophication) to 61 % (land use). The EAT-Lancet scenario resulted in 3-48 % larger reductions in impact than the FBDG scenario.

Conclusions

The Norwegian FBDG, while not as environmentally friendly as the EAT-Lancet reference diet, can still be an important tool in lessening environmental burden of Norwegian diets.

SUBMITTER: Lengle JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11010176 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Environmental impact of Norwegian self-selected diets: comparing current intake with national dietary guidelines and EAT-Lancet targets.

Lengle Julie Marie JM Michaelsen Bjøntegaard Marie M Hauger Carlsen Monica M Jafarzadeh Sepideh S Frost Andersen Lene L

Public health nutrition 20240325 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>Dietary environmental impact in a Norwegian adult population was estimated for six environmental impact categories. Moreover, environmental benefits of scenario diets complying with the Norwegian Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDG) and the EAT-Lancet reference diet were assessed.<h4>Design</h4>The current diet of Norwegian adults was estimated according to 24-h dietary recall data from a national dietary surveillance survey (Norkost 3). Scenario diets were modelled to represe ...[more]

PMID: 38523532

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing focus on moving populations towards healthier and more environmentally sustainable dietary patterns. The Australian Dietary Guidelines provide dietary patterns that promote health and wellbeing. It is unclear how these guidelines align with the more recently published global recommendations of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Reference Diet, and how Australian diets compare to both sets of recommendations.MethodsData from one 24-h recall collected for the 2011-13 National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey were analysed for 5,920 adults aged 19-50 years. Subgroups of this population were identified by diet quality and lower or higher consumption of foods often considered to be environmentally intensive (higher animal meat and dairy foods) or associated with healthiness (higher vegetables and lower discretionary choices). Food group and nutrient composition of Australian diets were compared to diets modelled on the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet. The environmental impacts of diets were estimated using an index of combined metrics.ResultsCompared with the Planetary Health Reference Diet, the Australian Dietary Guidelines contained more servings of the vegetable, dairy and alternatives, fruit, and discretionary choices. The amount of meat and alternatives was higher in the Planetary Health Reference Diet than Australian Dietary Guidelines due to the inclusion of more plant-based meat alternatives. The average Australian diet contained two to almost four times the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet maximum recommended intake of discretionary choices, and provided inadequate amounts of the vegetables, cereals, unsaturated fats and meats and alternatives food groups, primarily due to lower intakes of plant-based alternatives. The average Australian diet also contained less dairy and alternatives than the Australian Dietary Guidelines. In the average Australian diet, red meat and poultry contributed 73% to the total servings of meat and alternatives compared to 33% and 10% for the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet respectively. The modelled Australian Dietary Guidelines diet met the relevant nutrient reference value for all 22 nutrients examined, whereas the Planetary Health Reference Diet contained an inadequate amount of calcium. The environmental impact scores of the Planetary Health Reference Diet and Australian Dietary Guidelines were 31% and 46% lower than the average Australian diet.ConclusionsSignificant changes are required for Australians' dietary intake to align more closely with national and global dietary recommendations for health and environmental sustainability.

Project description:Background/objectivesFood prices are a crucial factor in food choices, especially for more vulnerable populations. To estimate the association between diet cost and quality, as measured by the EAT-Lancet score, across demographic groups in Brazil.MethodsData from the 2017/18 Household Budget Survey were used to calculate the EAT-Lancet score, comprising 14 components. Scores ranged from 0 (low adherence) to 42 (high adherence), with emphasized components (e.g., vegetables, fruits, legumes) and limited components (e.g., red meat, sugar, eggs). Results were stratified by per capita income, geographic region, and area of residence and compared using linear regression adjusted for high and low costs. In addition, the association between the EAT-Lancet score (and its emphasized and limited components) and diet cost (continuous) was analyzed for the total population and for income tertiles.ResultsThe mean EAT-Lancet score was 18.65 points (range: 7 to 25) and the mean diet cost was BRL$0.65/100 kcal. Total scores showed no significant difference between low- and high-cost diets. However, limited intake was more pronounced in low-cost diets, while high-cost diets featured emphasized foods such as fruits, vegetables, and seafood. High-cost diets also included sugars and red meat, while unsaturated fats scored higher in low-cost diets. Each one-point increase in the EAT-Lancet score was associated with a BRL$0.38 reduction in cost, driven by lower costs in the Limited component, especially among the lowest-income strata (reductions of BRL$1.58 and BRL$1.55 in the lowest income and middle income tertiles, respectively). However, higher scores for emphasized foods increased costs (BRL$0.89) in the lowest tertile.ConclusionsHigher EAT-Lancet scores were associated with reduced diet costs, likely influenced by the lower Limited component costs in low-income groups. Emphasized foods, however, tended to increase costs, particularly among the lowest-income group. These findings suggest that the role of diet composition plays a significant role in cost differences and underscore the challenges that low-income groups face in accessing affordable, healthy diets.

Project description:Residual feed intake (RFI) is the difference between observed and predicted feed intake of an animal, based on growth and maintenance requirements. In Yorkshire pigs, divergent selection for increased (Low RFI) and decreased (High RFI) RFI was carried out over 10 generations (G) while feeding a corn- and soybean-meal-based, higher-energy, lower-fiber (HELF) diet. In G8 to G10, representing 4 replicates, barrows and gilts (n = 649) of the RFI lines were fed the HELF diet and a diet incorporating coproducts that were lower in energy and higher in dietary fiber (LEHF). The diets differed in ME, 3.32 vs. 2.87 Mcal/kg, and in neutral detergent fiber (NDF), 9.4% vs. 25.9%, respectively. The impact of the LEHF diet on 1) performance and growth, 2) diet digestibility, 3) genetic parameter estimates, and 4) responses to selection for RFI, when fed the HELF, was assessed. In general, the LEHF diet reduced the performance of both lines. When fed the HELF diet, the Low RFI pigs had lower (P < 0.05) ADFI (-12%), energy intake (-12%), ADG (-6%), and backfat depth (-12%); similar (P > 0.05) loin muscle area (LMA; +5%); and greater (P < 0.05) feed efficiency (i.e., 8% higher G:F and 7% lower RFI) than the High RFI line. These patterns of line differences were still present under the LEHF diet but differences for ADFI (-11%), energy intake (-10%), G:F (+2%), and RFI (-6%) were reduced compared to the HELF diet. Apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of the HELF and LEHF diets was assessed using 116 barrows and gilts from G8. When fed the HELF diet, ATTD of DM, GE, N, and NDF were similar between lines (P ≥ 0.27), but when fed the LEHF diet, the Low RFI pigs had greater digestibility (7%, 7%, 10%, and 32%) than the High RFI line (P ≤ 0.04). To measure responses to selection for RFI and estimate genetic parameters, data from all 10 generations were used (HELF; n = 2,310; LEHF, n = 317). Heritability estimates of performance traits ranged from 0.19 to 0.63, and genetic correlations of traits between diets were high and positive, ranging from 0.87 (RFI) to 0.99 (LMA). By G10, RFI in the Low RFI line was 3.86 and 1.50 genetic SD lower than in the High RFI line when fed the HELF and LEHF diets, respectively. Taken together, the results of this study demonstrate that responses to selection for RFI when fed a HELF diet are not fully realized when pigs are fed an extremely LEHF diet. Thus, feeding diets that differ from those used for selection may not maximize genetic potential for feed efficiency.

Dataset Information

Environmental impact of Norwegian self-selected diets: comparing current intake with national dietary guidelines and EAT-Lancet targets.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Environmental impact of Norwegian self-selected diets: comparing current intake with national dietary guidelines and EAT-Lancet targets.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets