Reports on the negative effects associated with animal source foods tell us more about their being part of unhealthy diets than about the actual foods. Moreover, the idea that these foods would harm health is counterintuitive. In today's ultra-processed Western diets, the intake of animal source foods is considerably lower than the intake levels of meat and animal fat in most ancestral-type hunter-gatherer communities. While global meat consumption has risen due to economic growth in low- and middle-income countries, high-income nations have experienced a consistent decline in red meat consumption, offset by an increase in poultry consumption. In the Global South, enhancing access to animal source foods is crucial for addressing malnutrition among vulnerable populations. Tackling these issues necessitates culturally and economically appropriate interventions, as approaches centred around Western health theory may not be universally suitable.
This article addresses the following two questions:
- How animal-based are Western diets?
- How animal-based are non-Western diets?
For more detailed data and information, the most comprehensive global data on animal source food intake (with the exception of poultry) have been collected by the Global Dietary Database consortium [Miller et al. 2022], with a specific subset for intake by young populations [Miller et al. 2023].
_________________________________
How animal-based are Western diets?
In the Western world, there has been a resurgence in the consumption of animal source foods since the industrial transition. Currently, these foods contribute to 60% of per capita protein intake. However, it would be inaccurate to assume that this consumption is at a historical peak, contributing to a health crisis. The contribution of animal source foods to the caloric intake of Western diets is approximately 30%, which falls within the lower limit of what was evolutionarily relevant. Red meat intake has been declining for decades, whereas 'diseases of modernity' are on the rise. In contrast, today's diets are characterized by an increase in refined grains, sugars, plant-derived oils, and ultra-processed foods. In addition, there has been a rise in poultry consumption to offset the decline in red meat. Despite dietary guidelines recommending a further reduction in red meat intake, this steady decrease contrasts with the simultaneous increase in cardiometabolic diseases in the West. This incongruity suggests the necessity to reassess the current dietary paradigm.
Further reading (summary of the literature):
Even if animal source foods (ASF) have regained prominence in the West since the industrial transition, it would be erroneous to state that (1) their consumption is historically peaking and that they are, thus, (2) responsible for a health crisis. The fallacy relies on (1) the dismissal of the fact that much higher shares of ASF can sometimes be found in healthy non-Western populations [e.g., most hunter-gatherer communities; see elsewehere] and (2) on the hasty assumption that ASF are root causes of ill heath because they are part of the Western diet [rather than basing such assumptions on their intrinsic health properties; see elsewhere].
About 30% of all calories are animal-based
In contrast to common belief, the contribution of ASF to the caloric intake of Western diets [now about 30% in the US and EU; Tukker et al.. 2011; Rehkamp 2016; Westhoek et al. 2016] is lower than for most pre-agricultural diets [65% on average but somewhat lower at 40-50% in plant-abundant regions; see elsewhere]. In other words, the share of ASF in the diets of high-income countries is currently considerably below the one that typified ancestral diets for the vast majority of human existence on earth, during the Pleistocene era. This is particularly the case for the consumption of red meat, as will be discussed below, combined with the fact that the food gap has now largely been filled in by refined grains, sugars, plant-derived oils, and ultra-processed foods. Put differently, a mismatch has been created between with what is eaten today and what should be considered as human evolutionary diets, in their many variations. This is not trivial, as the human body has adjusted itself metabolically to such diets over a period of a few million years [see elsewhere]. Whether or not such mismatch is also causally problematic for poor health is a topic of debate [see elsewhere].
About 60% of all protein is animal-based
For protein, current per capita consumption in the EU has been estimated at about 85 g/d, of which ASF provide 50 g/d, which equals to about 60% [Westhoek et al. 2016]. Most of this animal protein is coming from meat (25 g/d) and dairy (20 g/d), followed by eggs, fish, and seafood (5 g/d). In general, for most high-income countries, the contribution of animal protein to total protein intake is situated between 50-70% [Drewnoswki 2024]. Protein contribution to caloric intake tends to be higher on average for meat eaters [18% of kcal] than for meat avoiders [11-15%] [Mariotti & Gardner 2019]. In evolutionary diets, the magnitude of protein contribution to calorie intake was likely 10-35% [Kuipers et al. 2010; see elsewhere]. The lower to mid end of this spectrum is not necessarily much different to current percentages, but within that share the ratio animal:plant protein has considerably declined.
Consumption of (red) meat
Today's meat consumption is often overestimated, depending on the calculation method used. In Italy, real intake is about 40 kg/p/y whereas the FAO reports 85 kg/p/y, which is based on carcass equivalent weight [Russo et al. 2016]. A similar ratio is found in France, with about 50 kg/p/y [Crédoc 2018], far below the 85 kg/p/y based on carcass equivalent weight [FranceAgriMer 2021]. In the US, per capita red meat consumption is estimated at 70 kg/p/y, plus 50 kg poultry, using carcass equivalent weight [World in Data 2017], but according to NHANES data, beef consumption by Americans aged 2 years and older averages 15 kg/p/y (42 g/p/d), of which fresh lean beef constitutes 12 kg/p/y (33 g/p/d), being below the upper limit set by US health recommendations [Lau et al. 2023]. Similarly, in the EU-27, per capita consumption of red meat has been estimated at 31 kg/y (85 g/d), consisting of 8 kg/y (23 g/d) of beef and lamb and 23 kg/y (62 g/d) of pork. In addition, poultry contributes 12 kg/y (32 g/d) [Westhoek et al. 2016]. For the UK, an average real meat intake of 30 kg/p/y was reported, of which 9 kg/p/y of red meat, 10 kg/p/y of processed meats, and 13 kg/p/y of white meat [Stewart et al. 2021]. These amounts may be substantial, but at best comparable and likely below what was consumed ancestrally [estimated by some authors at levels of up to 300-400 kg for Pleistocene diets; see elsewhere]. In addition to meat, Europeans consume dairy, butter and animal fats, eggs, and fish/seafood at levels of 7-11%, 3-6%, 1-2%, and 1-2% of the total caloric intake [Westhoek et al. 2016].
Trends in (red) meat consumption
It is false to assume that meat consumption levels are systematically rising. Although true at global level, due to economic growth in low- and middle-income countries, high-income nations have witnessed a decrease in the intake of red meat over the last four decades. The loss of red meat is (somewhat) compensated, however, by an increased consumption of poultry, as is the case for the EU [Westhoek et al. 2016]. In the UK, between 2008-2019, average meat consumption has decreased with >15% and >35% for red meat specifically (while white meat has increased with 10%) [Stewart et al. 2021]. In addition to muscle meats, offal meats are also consumed. In some Western countries, such as Belgium (11 kg/p/y) and Australia (9 kg/p/y), this is still considerable, but in many others, such as the USA, Canada, and Denmark, intake levels have become negligible (<0.5 kg/p/y) [Font-i-Furnols 2023]. Dietary guidelines are pushing to restrict red meat intake further to 16-26 kg/p/y, with some even setting a red-meat target of 5 kg/p/y and suggesting a residual total meat intake of merely 0-16 kg/p/y, including poultry [see elsewhere]. Strikingly, however, the West's steady decrease in red meat intake is at odds with the rise of cardiometabolic disease, suggestive of a need to rethink the current dietary paradigm [Feinman 2014; see elsewhere].
How animal-based are non-Western diets?
Further reading (summary of the literature):
Modern hunter-gatherers and pastoralists
In contrast to post-industrial countries, 'diseases of modernity' are rare in global hunter-gatherer communities [Eaton et al. 1988], despite the often higher ASF intake [Cordain et al. 2002] and - arguably - similar energy expenditure [Ponzer et al. 2012; Ponzer 2015]. Also, the adaptive life span in such ancestral communities would be about seven decades (in the absence of modern hygiene, medical care, food security, and low homicide levels), were it not for the very high death rates at early age [Gurven & Kaplan 2007] and the impact of widespread conspecific violence [Hill et al. 2007]. This does not necessarily mean that high levels of ASF would be the only appropriate or even best choice for good health, but it does suggest that they are not indicative of clear health damage as is now being claimed by some authors [see elsewhere].
In addition to modern hunter-gatherers, some of the global pastoralist communities can also display high intake levels of ASF, above what is consumed in high-income countries. The Turkana, for instance, are still obtaining 62% of their calories from dairy and 12% from meat, fat, and blood [Lea et al. 2020]. In some cases, pastoralists supply ASF beyond their own communities. In India, 6-8% of the population is directly or indirectly involved in pastoralism, providing 3/4 of the national meat supply and 1/2 of the country's milk [Kukreti 2020].
It is only upon the transition from their various ancestral diets to nutrient-poor but energy-rich foods that indigenous hunter-gatherer and pastoralist communities rapidly develop various cardiometabolic diseases [Joseph & Turner 2020], as has been documented for the Turkana [Lea et al. 2020], Nenets [Science Alert 2017], and Inuit [Kenny et al. 2018]. This goes hand in hand with a poor nutritional status, for instance with respect to the intake of iron, zinc, and vitamin D [Rosol et al. 2016; Kenny et al. 2019]. Although such Westernization of the diet is clearly damaging, data on the protective effects of Inuit diets against cardiovascular disease may nonetheless be less clear than sometimes assumed [Bjerregaard et al. 2003].
Low- and middle-income countries
In most low-income, lower-middle, and upper-middle income countries, animal protein constitutes 10-30%, 20-40%, and 30-60% of all protein, respectively [Drewnowski 2024]. In the Global South, vulnerable populations would benefit from improved access to (and higher consumption of) nutrient-dense ASF [Paul et al. 2021; see elsewhere]. They are not only particularly prone to (micro)nutrient deficiencies but also increasingly so to obesity and non-communicable diseases. Together with increased exposure to ultra-processed foods from transnational corporations, this has resulted in the so-called 'double' or even 'triple burden of malnutrition' [Nugent et al. 2020]. The way these problems are addressed by governmental agencies is typically through ill-adapted and Western-centric recommendations and interventions [see elsewhere]. Also, attempts to improve the accessibility of ASFs have to face specific economic and cultural barriers as well as religious contexts [as is, for instance, the case for India; see elsewhere].
