Planetary health diet

Health, Fitness, Food, Insurance, Longevity, Diets,...
Sarouel
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:37 am

Planetary health diet

Post by Sarouel »

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... scientists

"The first science-based diet that tackles both the poor food eaten by billions of people and averts global environmental catastrophe has been devised."

"The “planetary health diet” was created by an international commission seeking to draw up guidelines that provide nutritious food to the world’s fast-growing population. At the same time, the diet addresses the major role of farming – especially livestock – in driving climate change, the destruction of wildlife and the pollution of rivers and oceans."

https://www.thelancet.com/commissions/EAT

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by jacob »

I/we already eat that way^H^H^H^H^Hbetter than that, but our diet does resemble what they came up with, which is basically a moderate flexitarian diet. Fair enough. Gotta start somewhere. We're more hardcore because being hardcore gets better results.

Here, we use meat as a condiment (if we use it---it happens maybe once a week). This means adding a few pieces for taste and by a few pieces I mean maybe the volume of a thumb in an entire meal. Fish (prey fish) is the preferred meat. Depending on where you're coming from, you can either see that as a hardcore flexitarian or cheater(*)-vegan.

For an even healthier (but more expensive version), dial down the usage of fast/refined cars as much as possible. This means no pasta, bread, and rice. Again, it's possible to be flexible here: Instead of no "white carbs", think of them as a condiment. This might mean using only 1/2 a potato for a meal. For more on this see the Longevity Diet by Valter Longo. Depending on framework, this ends up as cheater-vegan-paleo :P :geek:

If widely adopted, this would really be huge in terms of both feeding the world and eliminating soil degredation, methane emissions (from lifestock), and NOx from overworked fields. While not as damaging as power production, the current western diet has a big of a footprint as our love of driving.

That is of course not to say how much it would do for health care costs in "fat countries" where lifestyle diseases are the most likely form of death.

Of course, the majority of humans have decided to tack in the opposite direction trying to increase their consumption of [red] meat which is still considered a luxury rather than a liability, just like cars. I have, however, seen some trying to go for things like Meatless Monday. If everybody did that, that would also be BIG albeit not big enough ... but certainly above and beyond switching their light bulbs.

(*) I used to be a strict vegetarian (and also a strict warrior dieter). I find that making occasional exceptions for social reasons, like eating breakfast, eating a pizza, or a piece of cake, to be a lot easier than demanding that people cater to my special needs. However, as immensely satisfying gulping down a meat&cheese pizza or a handful of cookies feel in the moment, there's definitely a prize to be paid in feeling suboptimal in the hours after.

PS: I understand that diet is a trigger word here and some can be sensitive. I am mainly referring to what works for the average person in controlled studies. Of course the "best" diet is found by personal experimentation. What is unequivocal is the damage that livestock production does to the planetary support-systems. Whether that is acceptable is currently a political question ... whereas in a few generations it will a question of survival for either the humans or the livestock or both.

iopsi
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:30 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by iopsi »

I guess the majority in this forum already eat pretty much as the article suggest (i do).
The current average diet is one of the most insane things that the average person does imo, since there is literally no upside to eating tons of animal products. It's way more expensive, more harmful for the person and for the planet. And it's pretty easy to make tasteful meals with legumes, whole grains and vegetables (and a little bit of cheese or meat can always be added for taste).

Nothing positive about it really, while for example (even tho it is still very wasteful and in many cases not necessary) using a car can be a bit understandable sometimes, if the work place is very far and there is no possibility of living nearer.

EDIT: even for athletic performance i don't think animal products are really needed. There are many elite level lifters that are vegetarian or strictly vegan (i myself did my PRs all while eating very little amounts of animal products). That's for strength sports tho, not sure if it is true for endurance sports too (but i suspect it is).

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by BRUTE »

iopsi wrote:
Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:01 pm
there is literally no upside to eating tons of animal products
tastes so good though. that's an upside.

brute would also question the assumption that the SAD contains "tons of animal products". what percentage of an average diet comes from animal products? it seems to be mostly sugar, grains, and vegetable oils, all of which are vegan.

iopsi
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:30 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by iopsi »

@BRUTE

Yes if you specifically want the taste of meat. What i meant is that in general, taste isn't sacrificed by going meat-less or almost so. But admittedly my statement was an exaggeration.

I also agree that most of the calories of the SAD probably comes from the fats of vegetable oils and refined carbs. But the animal component, even if a smaller % of calories, is still too high. Every meal of a SAD probably contains a significant serving of animal products.

Also refined carbs and oils might be vegan, but aren't necessarily the healthiest choice. So they are part of the problem regarding health (togheter with too much animal products, imo).

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

I read the report and think it is pretty solid, especially given the notes on "grain of salt" for regional and cultural application*. For instance, if it's January in Michigan, and you think you are doing your part to save the planet by purchasing an $8.99 baby spinach, avocado, pecan and strawberry salad in a plastic container vs. $1.29 small burger...? OTOH, big bowl of cabbage soup, slice of whole-grain bread spread with sunflower butter, and some stewed prunes for dessert :D

The only suggestions I don't quite grok is why corn/wheat/rice is so favored over potatoes and dairy over eggs in the allotment? Potatoes can be grown on relatively poor soil in a manner that doesn't encourage as much run-off as wheat and offers at least as good nutrition as corn, and eggs vs. dairy seems like a pretty even trade-off in terms of nutrition and production. I assume it must have something to do with serious over-dependence on potatoes and poultry in some regions.

IMO, the best aspect of this diet is that it does seem to favor tree crops with its suggestions of greatly increased nut and fruit consumption.

*The Animal can keep eating the moose meat he hunts.

vexed87
Posts: 1521
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:02 am
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by vexed87 »

I am surprised that more emphasis hasn't been placed on localised seasonal produce, but that's clearly a challenge for another day when our starting point is the globalised industrial agriculture system.

oldbeyond
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:43 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by oldbeyond »

Health-wise, because SAD is so sub-optimal(a lot of calories from refined sugar, white flour and highly refined vegetable oils), deviating from SAD generally leads to big improvements. Whether your diet is vegan, paleo, Atkins or USDA's Dietary Guidelines, it probably improves your diet by removing sugary drinks, cookies, chips, Twinkies, frozen pizza etc. I think this is much more important than the distribution of macronutrients, plant based vs animal foods, gluten etc. What's best probably comes down to personality/individual variations in genetics/habits. And because there are people in every camp who have seen dramatic improvements when switching to their diet, the debates between the different camps become very heated. At the same time they all agree on a lot of things(like removing junk foods and cutting out sugary drinks), but that gets a bit lost in the debate. Personally I think it'd be interesting to completely determine the effects of strict veganism compared to the carnivore diet with regards to human health, but I doubt the findings would revolutionize public health. Just like great research on various investment strategies doesn't do much to improve personal finance among the gen pop - it's the basics that matter.

As for environmental impacts, there are a lot of nuances to be sure, but I think most data seems to indicate that plant based foods are generally lower footprint. A good rule of thumb, if not the final solution, just like the proposed diet is aiming to be.

I'm aiming to eat more legumes and nuts(for my health) and decrease eggs and dairy some(likely won't improve my health, but likely good for the planet).

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@vexed87:

I think the report does nod head at notion that regional common-sense should apply over global metrics, but the multitude of articles reporting on the report are unlikely to make that point clear.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by IlliniDave »

I'm definitely in the: "If we aren't supposed to eat animals why are so many made out of food?" camp. Take that diet, ditch 90% of the grains and 2/3-3/4 of the dairy and split the bulk between meat/fish and non-starchy vegetables and I could eat it without a "metabolic syndrome" health crisis. Although with only 12 years to go it probably wouldn't kill me.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@IlliniDave:

You can have my share of meat in exchange for your share of sugar.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by BRUTE »

iopsi wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:25 am
I also agree that most of the calories of the SAD probably comes from the fats of vegetable oils and refined carbs. But the animal component, even if a smaller % of calories, is still too high.
what constitutes "too high" a percentage of animal components?

brute's problem with this whole line of thinking is the conflation of optimizing for individual human health vs. an abstract idea of "saving the planet" (e.g. minimizing CO2 emissions). it is a nice idea that these overlap or are generally the same thing, but that is not true.

most obvious problems with modern diet, as mentioned by oldbeyond, are vegan - refined grains, refined vegetable oils, sugar. moving from an "animal product containing" SAD to a "whole food vegan" diet might improve health, but not because the animal products were removed.

in fact, besides individual allergy to dairy (which apparently lots of humans have), brute is not aware of a single negative effect on human health that animal products have. unlike the above listed plant products.

so while brute is OK with humans eating vegan because they think it will save the planet (brute does not think this). but it would be great if there was no conflation with the effects on health.

User avatar
Lemur
Posts: 1612
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:40 am
Location: USA

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by Lemur »

I agree with Brute on this topic. I'm an outlier here on this forum (I consume meat daily).

A couple of reasons to back my mostly pro-meat stance...

1.) Vegetarian / Vegan Diets lack these key supplements:
B12, Iron, and Zinc

2.) This article... https://journals.plos.org/plosone/artic ... GRZ21HI6rU

"Our study has shown that Austrian adults who consume a vegetarian diet are less healthy (in terms of cancer, allergies, and mental health disorders), have a lower quality of life, and also require more medical treatment. Therefore, a continued strong public health program for Austria is required in order to reduce the health risk due to nutritional factors. Moreover, our results emphasize the necessity of further studies in Austria, for a more in-depth analysis of the health effects of different dietary habits."

3.) Meat = High Quality Protein. You don't get all the required amino acids from veggies and even if you do by making strategic mixes of foods, the bioavaiability of the protein in these veggies, legumes, etc. cannot be matched with meat.

I think a great compromise (compromise as in between your personal health and protecting the environment) would be is basically being a lazy vegetarian (pescetarians ?) ....eat your eggs, milk, and consume fish because fish is high quality protein and the ratio of fatty acids (EPA/DHA) in fish is very good for you; especially brain health. Eat meat sparingly (it costs a lot anyway) but if you're bodybuilding , weight lifting, or anything like that; the protein in meat greatly enhances recovery.

I've not been convinced by the vegan documentaries on Netflix...its obvious an agenda is being pushed and the science is lacking in my opinion. I don't claim to be an expert but I take most things with a grain of salt...I also tend to just listen to whatever Lyle Mcdonald has to say on the subject. Guy is a nutritional genius that has been on the top of the latest research since the 90s.

I also personally know a lifelong vegan with some mental illness and physical problems...he switched to a more pescetarian diet and added some meat to his diet just recently and the result was he added 30 pounds (was very skinny) and no longer needed therapy for depression. So there is that.

Also I think the climate effects are a bit overstated but admittingly I haven't done proper research on this topic myself to make a concrete opinion...
Last edited by Lemur on Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 986
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by Bankai »

BRUTE wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:10 pm
in fact, besides individual allergy to dairy (which apparently lots of humans have), brute is not aware of a single negative effect on human health that animal products have. unlike the above listed plant products.
Yes, yes. And fiber causes cancer. Yes, we know.

prognastat
Posts: 991
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:30 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by prognastat »

@Bankai
Not a very productive addition to the discussion. The things Brute mentioned regarding grains, vegetable oils and sugar are all things with cause for concern health-wise. Then strawmanning his position(even if you just want to make fun of it) by making a ridiculous addition that he has never mentioned and hasn't been raised as a cause for concern is counterproducitve to a healthy discussion regarding this matter. It would be better to make the case for your position rather than mock his.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 986
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by Bankai »

@ Lemur:

1) plenty of plant foods have iron and zinc. B12 you need to suplement, yes, because all veggies in supermarket come prewashed etc. In not so recent times, you'd just pick a carrot from the ground and while eating it, get all the B12 you need. Still , plenty of foods come fortified, i.e. soys milk. Alternatively, a pill per week will do.

2) the bit quoted contradicts scores of other research. Will habe a read and find out why.

3) complete protein myth has been debunked decades ago but keeps being brought up over and over again. But it's a myth.

There is no nutrient in animals that can't be had from better, cleaner sources (plants) without all the harmful stuff that goes with it.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 986
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by Bankai »

prognastat wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:47 am
@Bankai
Not a very productive addition to the discussion. The things Brute mentioned regarding grains, vegetable oils and sugar are all things with cause for concern health-wise. Then strawmanning his position(even if you just want to make fun of it) by making a ridiculous addition that he has never mentioned and hasn't been raised as a cause for concern is counterproducitve to a healthy discussion regarding this matter. It would be better to make the case for your position rather than mock his.
Sorry but contradicting mountain of scientific evidence (that animal products are harmful) requires response. I'm not disputing that sugar is bad or saying that vegan always equals healthy, but that animal foods are not harmful. What if someone repeatedly wrote that they are not aware of any harmful effects of smoking cigarettes?

And yes, brute did write that fiber causes cancer. In another diet topic.

User avatar
Lemur
Posts: 1612
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:40 am
Location: USA

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by Lemur »

Bankai wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:55 am
@ Lemur:

1) plenty of plant foods have iron and zinc. B12 you need to suplement, yes, because all veggies in supermarket come prewashed etc. In not so recent times, you'd just pick a carrot from the ground and while eating it, get all the B12 you need. Still , plenty of foods come fortified, i.e. soys milk. Alternatively, a pill per week will do.

2) the bit quoted contradicts scores of other research. Will habe a read and find out why.

3) complete protein myth has been debunked decades ago but keeps being brought up over and over again. But it's a myth.

There is no nutrient in animals that can't be had from better, cleaner sources (plants) without all the harmful stuff that goes with it.
1.) The bio availability of these nutrients is very low in regards to meat consumption. You would have to eat a buttload of veggies to even reach the levels you would consume from a smaller portion of meat.

2.) I will admit I cherry picked this one but honestly you can find scores of research that are both pro-meat and anti-meat and pro-vegan and anti-vegan and it is very difficult to discern who is correct. It may simply be possible there is no one right answer...

3.) I should clarify my stance. I've heard of the complete protein myth and will agree that one could reach there protein requirements from a vegetarian diet for general health / life purposes; but for athletic purposes (especially involving protein breakdown) leucine and lysine are two amino acids that the body greatly prefers for muscle recovery and protein synthesis (there are 6 others that I don't know off the top of my head)... in any case...plants and legumes tend to lack these.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by C40 »

I specifically like eating meat (both meat and plants). Eating meat feels like an additional connection to the living world - - to eat something that was alive in the animal sense and had a consciousness.

For the same reasons I much prefer eating leaves, fruit, vegetables over, say, a Cheeto, which of course is made up of real-world things, but after all that manufacturing work, packaging and labeling, color, etc, it certainly doesn't feel the same.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Planetary health diet

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

The planetary health diet does allow for small amounts of meat and modest amounts of dairy. Is more needed than this for efficient muscle regeneration, etc?

Most food humans currently eat has been greatly modified through generations of breeding towards that purpose, so modifications brought about my final processing aren't necessarily any more likely to be unhealthy. For instance, a Honey Crisp apple is going to be appealing to many creatures for the same reasons it is appealing to us, so it is often sprayed with toxins to reduce access. If it is then processed with sugar and put in a jar, this is in aid of further reducing waste/rot. Salt and sugar are both preservatives because they put osmotic pressure on microbes.

I only mention these realities, because the diet people might need to follow to potentially survive 10 billion strong may differ from the diet people may need to follow if this plan fails.

Post Reply