Consumption Alberto Garzón enrages the livestock sector by encouraging them to eat less meat to protect the planet
Nutrition Criticisms of the controversial study that gives free rein to the consumption of red and processed meat
I admit that I am a natural spoiler and I was always somewhat skeptical when during confinement I heard those phrases that were repeated like mantras: "From this we will come out better" or "from now on we will bet more on science."
A year later and in view of the results ... neither one thing nor the other.
It is clear that science continues to matter what is fair.
Proof of this is the situation we have experienced this month as a result of the campaign to reduce meat consumption promoted by the Ministry of Consumption.
Is it something "very crazy" and novel to propose a reduction in meat consumption?
No. Without going into the political debate, the truth is that the nutritional recommendations advocated by this campaign are exactly the same as those found in the main dietary guidelines around the world. From the United States to Australia, passing through our own country, health authorities are committed to reducing their intake. The excessive consumption of red and processed meat increases the risk of heart disease, diabetes and even some types of cancer. Not forgetting, of course, the risk of being overweight and obese. In fact, this is one of the few topics in nutrition where there is broad consensus. To muddy the scientific evidence with the gastronomic preferences or with the political and economic interests of a specific sector confirms the theory that in a matter of supporting science,in this country we have made little progress.
Reduce, not ban. How much meat can I have a week?
Although some have sharpened their butcher knife assuming that it is intended to end red meat in Spain, no one has actually talked about it. What is proposed, simply, is to reduce its consumption. This is something that makes all the sense in the world, since Spain is the country in the European Union that consumes the most meat. To give us an idea, the recommendation of the Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition (AESAN) and also of the agencies of other countries such as Sweden or Finland is not to exceed 500 grams per week. The average consumption of Spaniards roughly doubles this amount. The AESAN indicates in its recommendations that the appropriate thing would be to consume between two and four servings of meat a week of between 100 and 125 grams each. Now, within those four servings,it is indicated that the consumption should preferably be of poultry or rabbit. In summary, and being practical, if we talk about red meat, you should not consume more than two servings per week.
Five alternatives to eating red meat
If we eat less meat ... will we have enough nutrients?
That is the million dollar question that many carnivores ask themselves.
And the answer is yes.
The American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) ensures that vegetarian diets - well planned, like any other diet - are appropriate for all ages and even for athletes, for whom protein is essential.
It is true that red meat provides protein and some relevant minerals and vitamins such as iron or vitamin B12.
But man does not live on steak alone.
There are other sources of nutrients that by themselves, or in combination with other foods, can be healthier than ribeye.
And even more sustainable, although that's another melon.
We talk about eggs, poultry, fish, legumes and, finally, the "laboratory meat" that is trending topic lately.
The
eggs
provide the protein with higher biological value.
Not even the best ribeye in Kobe has a higher quality protein than a humble chicken egg.
By the way, myths out!
It is false that you should not eat more than three eggs a week.
The
birds and fish
also provide high quality protein and have a healthier fat profile than red meat. Specifically, eating oily fish is one of the best ways to meet the requirements of the famous omega 3 fatty acids.
With regard to
legumes
, we still have a long way to go to bring them to the place they deserve.
Although their protein is of lower biological value, legumes are a great source of this nutrient if consumed throughout the day in appropriate combination with cereals, nuts and other foods.
In addition, some legumes and pseudo-cereals (such as quinoa) contain all the essential amino acids.
We can also promote the absorption of iron from legumes if we consume them together with foods rich in vitamin C.
The
"vegetable meat"
Finally, it is becoming more and more popular. It has had a lot to do with it that Bill Gates himself has invested a fortune in designing his own "vegan ribeye". Currently these products are not only found in specialized supermarkets but in many restaurants, including hamburger chains, as one more option on the menu. These products are usually made from soy or pea protein and can be enriched by incorporating vitamins such as B12. Could they be a healthier option than red meat? Depending on the composition, because there are, there are all kinds, they can be. Are "vegetable meats" a more sustainable option? Although they are made in an industrial process, it might be more sustainable to eat "vegetable meat" than a ribeye. However,What we know 100% is that they are less sustainable for your pocket, since they cost around € 20 / kg and can be as expensive as a "real" steak. In my opinion, it is one more resource, especially for vegetarians, but it should not be the way we should follow if we are looking for a healthy and sustainable diet.
Meat and sustainability: the other "melon" of the ribeye.
Beyond the nutritional benefits of reducing meat consumption, the idea of the campaign proposed by the Ministry of Consumption is to look not only for the health of our navel, but also for the health of the planet. Criticisms have not been slow to appear here, and they have come in the middle of a data war on whether cow emissions are really that relevant. It is true that cows are not to blame for climate change. Cow "burps" and "farts" were not an environmental problem in the 19th century. But that is not why we can leave aside that the environmental impact of livestock can vary significantly depending on the way of breeding. Our leaders, instead of enjoying themselves in this "steak-gate", could perhaps direct their efforts to what is really important:support the reduction of intensive livestock in favor of other more sustainable and environmentally friendly models. We may need a couple more pandemics to "get better." Meanwhile, to undertake these debates from the evidence and not from the brother-in-law, the truth is that we only need a little more responsibility and information.
According to the criteria of The Trust Project
Know more
Science and Health
Spain
Covid-19Coronavirus today, last minute |
Extremadura asks the Justice to close the perimeter of two towns with very high incidence
The dangerous race of variants, which one predominates at the moment?
Covid-19Coronavirus today, last minute |
Vaccines, screenings and restrictions: the CCAA look for how to stop the infections in young people
See links of interest
Last News
Gay from Liebana
Work calendar
Home THE WORLD TODAY
Master Investigation Journalism
Tokyo 2020
Live, last stage of the Tour, ending on the Champs-Elysées