# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Table of Contents

Table of Contents Ask the Chatbot

ultra-processed food (UPF), any of a variety of industrially produced foods that contain or are made primarily of highly processed ingredients, including artificial additives, and that typically have high levels of fat, sugar, or salt. Examples of ultra-processed foods include frozen foods, breakfast cereals, packaged snacks, lunch meats, hot dogs, soft drinks, and distilled alcoholic beverages. UPFs are hyperpalatable and have great appeal as convenience foods. They often also are aggressively marketed, with attractive packaging and branding by transnational corporations.

Common ingredients in UPFs include artificial flavorings, artificial food colorings, high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, preservatives, and hydrolyzed proteins (mixtures of amino acids and peptides produced by protein breakdown via hydrolysis). UPFs typically are calorie dense, owing to high fat and sugar content, and are low in dietary fiber, protein, vitamins, and minerals.

History and prevalence

During World War II, military needs spurred significant innovation in the production and distribution of processed foods, greatly increasing the ease of transport and shelf life of food products and ultimately leading to widespread availability of canned and packaged goods. As a result, following the war, highly processed foods became common, particularly in American diets. In the 1980s the term ultra-processed food was introduced, being used in reference to a growing contingent of convenience foods and snacks.

Since the late 20th century, UPFs have become increasingly prevalent worldwide. Roughly half the total dietary energy consumed in high-income countries, such as Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom, comes from UPFs. In middle-income countries, such as Brazil, Chile, and Mexico, between one-fifth and nearly one-third of total dietary energy is from UPF consumption.

Classification

UPFs constitute Group 4 in the Nova classification system, which categorizes foods according to the extent of their processing (Group 1 being unprocessed or minimally processed foods, and Group 4 being the greatest extent of processing). As Group 4 food products, UPFs are defined as consisting essentially of industrial formulations, with five or more ingredients that may contain some processed culinary ingredients but also include substances not commonly used in culinary preparations. UPFs are further defined as potentially containing additives that are intended to mimic the qualities of unprocessed or minimally processed foods or that are incorporated to disguise undesirable characteristics of the final product.

Health effects

The hyperpalatability and convenience of UPFs lend them to excess consumption. Overeating of such products results in excessive calorie intake, which negatively impacts health and can lead, in particular, to obesity and metabolic disturbances. Excess salt intake from UPFs can further contribute to hypertension, with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases such as stroke. High levels of trans fats and saturated fats in UPFs can also fuel elevations in levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, which can have additional adverse effects on cardiovascular health.

In response to negative health impacts, many countries, states, and municipalities have taken steps to discourage UPF consumption. Examples include the introduction of excise taxes on unhealthy beverage and food products and mandates for front-of-package warning labels to identify high-calorie UPFs.

Jordana Rosenfeld The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ultra-processed food (UPF) | Description, History, Classification, & Health Effects | Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ultra-processed food is any of a variety of industrially produced foods that contain or are made primarily of highly processed ingredients, including artificial additives, and that typically have high levels of fat, sugar, or salt.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is food waste and why is it a problem? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What is food waste and why is it a problem? 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
America wastes roughly 40 percent of its food. Of the estimated 125 to 160 billion pounds of food that goes to waste every year, much of it is perfectly edible and nutritious. Food is lost or wasted for a variety of reasons: bad weather, processing problems, overproduction and unstable markets cause food loss long before it arrives in a grocery store, while overbuying, poor planning and confusion over labels and safety contribute to food waste at stores and in homes. Food waste also has a staggering price tag, costing this country approximately $218 billion per year. Uneaten food also puts unneeded strain on the environment by wasting valuable resources like water and farmland. At a time when 12 percent of American households are food insecure , reducing food waste by just 15 percent could provide enough sustenance to feed more than 25 million people, annually.

What Is Wasted Food?

There are two main kinds of wasted food: food loss and food waste. Food loss is the bigger category, and incorporates any edible food that goes uneaten at any stage. In addition to food that's uneaten in homes and stores, this includes crops left in the field, food that spoils in transportation, and all other food that doesn't make it to a store. Some amount of food is lost at nearly every stage of food production. Food waste is a specific piece of food loss, which the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS), defines as "food discarded by retailers due to color or appearance and plate waste by consumers." Food waste includes the half-eaten meal left on the plate at a restaurant, food scraps from preparing a meal at home and the sour milk a family pours down the drain.

Food Loss in Manufacturing Facilities

Most waste at manufacturing and processing facilities is generated while trimming off edible portions, such as skin, fat, crusts and peels from food. Some of this is recovered and used for other purposes - in the US, about 33 percent of food waste from manufacturing goes to animal feed. Even with this recovered and reused material taken out of the calculation, about two billion pounds of food are wasted in the food processing or manufacturing stage. A number of issues, like overproduction, product damage and technical problems at manufacturing facilities contribute to these large quantities of food waste. Much like farms, food processing facilities are vulnerable to labor disruptions and shortages. During the COVID-19 outbreak, many meat processing facilities closed as workers fell ill, which forced processing plants to close. This meant that the animals, which could no longer be processed, were slaughtered and discarded by the thousand.

Food Loss in Transportation and Distribution Networks

During food transportation and distribution, perishable foods are vulnerable to loss, especially in developing nations where access to adequate and reliable refrigeration, infrastructure and transportation can be a challenge. While this is not a significant source of food waste in the US; food waste does occur when produce spoils from improper refrigeration. A larger problem occurring at this stage is the rejection of perishable food shipments, which are thrown out if another buyer can't be found quickly. It is estimated that between two and five percent of food shipments are rejected by food buyers. Even if these goods make it to market, they are often wasted anyway because of shorter shelf lives. Often, rejected food shipments are donated to food rescue organizations, but the quantities are too large to accept.

Where is Food Wasted?

Food Waste in Retail Businesses

An estimated 43 billion pounds of food were wasted in US retail stores in 2010. This is particularly disconcerting given that in 2016, 12.3 percent of American households were food insecure. Most of the loss in retail operations is in perishables, including baked goods, produce, meat, seafood and prepared meals. The USDA estimates that supermarkets lose $15 billion annually in unsold fruit and vegetables alone. Unfortunately, wasteful practices in the retail industry are often viewed as good business strategies. Some of the main drivers for food loss at retail stores include: overstocked product displays, expectation of cosmetic perfection of fruits, vegetables and other foods, oversized packages, the availability of prepared food until closing, expired "sell by" dates, damaged goods, outdated seasonal items, over purchasing of unpopular foods and under staffing.

Currently, only 10 percent of edible wasted food is recovered each year, in the US. Barriers to recovering food are liability concerns, distribution and storage logistics and funds needed for gleaning, collecting, packaging and distribution. The Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, signed into law in 1996, provides legal liability protection for food donors and recipients and tax benefits for participating businesses. However, awareness about this law and trust in the protections it offers remains low.
Photo on previous page by Pixavril/Adobe Stock.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn more about our massive food waste problem, from fields and fishing boats to grocery stories and household kitchens.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
1/3 of all food produced globally goes to waste. We waste not just food, but all the natural resources which go into producing it. Today, our number one priority must be to fight food waste and Save 1/3.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

There are about 20,000 species of bees in the world, and they are probably the most important insect pollinators. The thousands of bee species have unique flight patterns and floral preferences, and many have coevolved with flowers in such a way that their body sizes and behaviors almost perfectly complement the flowers they pollinate. Sadly, bees of all types are in decline worldwide, as are many other insects. The familiar honeybee has suffered greatly from colony collapse disorder, in which hives suddenly lose their adult members. Populations of bumblebees and other solitary bees have steeply declined in many places, largely because of insecticide and herbicide use, habitat loss, and global warming. Some species, such as the rusty patched bumblebee, are even listed as endangered species.

If all of the world's bees died off, there would be major rippling effects throughout ecosystems. A number of plants, such as many of the bee orchids, are pollinated exclusively by specific bees, and they would die off without human intervention. This would alter the composition of their habitats and affect the food webs they are part of and would likely trigger additional extinctions or declines of dependent organisms. Other plants may utilize a variety of pollinators, but many are most successfully pollinated by bees. Without bees, they would set fewer seeds and would have lower reproductive success. This too would alter ecosystems. Beyond plants, many animals, such as the beautiful bee-eater birds, would lose their prey in the event of a die-off, and this would also impact natural systems and food webs.

In terms of agriculture, the loss of bees would dramatically alter human food systems but would not likely lead to famine. The majority of human calories still come from cereal grains, which are wind-pollinated and are therefore unaffected by bee populations. Many fruits and vegetables, however, are insect-pollinated and could not be grown at such a large scale, or so cheaply, without bees. Blueberries and cherries, for example, rely on honeybees for up to 90 percent of their pollination. Although hand-pollination is a possibility for most fruit and vegetable crops, it is incredibly labor-intensive and expensive. Tiny robotic pollinator drones have been developed in Japan but remain prohibitively expensive for entire orchards or fields of time-sensitive flowers. Without bees, the availability and diversity of fresh produce would decline substantially, and human nutrition would likely suffer. Crops that would not be cost-effective to hand- or robot-pollinate would likely be lost or persist only with the dedication of human hobbyists.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
colony collapse disorder (CCD), disorder affecting honeybee colonies that is characterized by sudden colony death, with a lack of healthy adult bees inside the hive. Although the cause is not known, researchers suspect that multiple factors may be involved. The disorder appears to affect the adult bees' ability to navigate. They leave the hive to find pollen and never return. Honey and pollen are usually present in the hive, and there is often evidence of recent brood rearing. In some cases the queen and a small number of survivor bees may remain in the brood nest. CCD is also characterized by delayed robbing of the honey in the dead colonies by other, healthy bee colonies in the immediate area, as well as slower than normal invasion by common pests, such as wax moths and small hive beetles. The disorder appears to affect only the European honeybee (Apis mellifera).

Colony loss and economic impact

The unexplained loss of honeybee colonies that came to be known as CCD was first reported in the fall of 2006 by a commercial beekeeper from Pennsylvania, U.S., who was overwintering his colonies in Florida. (Subsequent investigations suggested that beekeepers had experienced unexplained colony losses for at least the previous three years; similar losses had been reported previously as well, including in the late 19th century and in various decades of the 20th century.) By February 2007 several large commercial migratory beekeeping operations in the United States had reported cases of CCD, with some operators suffering the loss of 50-90 percent of their colonies. Many of these larger operations were overwintering their colonies in California, Florida, Oklahoma, and Texas. By late February 2007 some nonmigratory operations located in the mid-Atlantic region and the Pacific Northwest of the United States also had reported the loss of more than 50 percent of their colonies. The absence of dead bees in the affected hives made initial investigations difficult and inconclusive. That same year, other countries, including Canada, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Greece, Germany, Poland, France, and Switzerland, also reported substantial losses of honeybees. From 2006 to 2011 total annual colony losses in the United States averaged around 33 percent; beekeepers cited CCD as the cause of roughly one-third of those losses.

Beekeeping is a critical component of modern agriculture. CCD not only threatens the beekeeping operations that provide pollination service and honey production but also has the potential for crippling the production of the many crops that are dependent on honeybees for pollination. In the United States, beekeepers provide pollination service for more than 90 commercially grown crops, including many fruits and vegetables. The economic value of U.S. crops that benefit from honeybee pollination has been estimated at $15 billion annually. In 2006 the California almond export crop alone was valued at $1.9 billion and required more than one million bee colonies for pollination (out of a total of about 2.6 million colonies in the United States). With the number of available colonies for crop pollination in the country in decline, the beekeeping industry faced a tremendous challenge in meeting the demand for pollination services.

Suspected causes

The Agricultural Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture organized efforts to address the CCD crisis through surveys and data collection, samples analysis, and mitigation and preventive measures. A variety of possible causes of CCD were suggested. They included chemical contamination of colony food stores or beeswax; poisoning from pesticides, including nicotine-based insecticides known as neonicotinoids (the use of which has been restricted in some countries); possible lack of genetic diversity in colonies; and infection of colonies by pathogens or parasites, including known honeybee parasites such as the single-celled microsporidians (parasitic fungus) Nosema ceranae and N. apis and the invasive varroa mite ( Varroa destructor).

Multiple studies have suggested that CCD might be the result of simultaneous exposure to a combination of two or more pathogens or stressors, in which the combination of stressors has a synergistic effect. Bee colonies are commonly found to be infested with pathogens and parasites, and the investigation of the interactions of all the possible causative agents has proved to be a challenge for bee researchers. Pathogens that have been implicated in CCD include acute bee paralysis virus, Ascosphaera apis (chalkbrood disease), black queen cell virus, chronic bee paralysis virus, deformed wing virus, invertebrate iridescent virus, Israeli acute paralysis virus, Kashmir bee virus, Nosema species, Paenibacillus larvae (American foulbrood), and sacbrood virus. Many of those pathogens are present in increased abundance in hives affected by CCD, and varroa mites are capable of transmitting deadly honeybee viruses, including black queen cell virus and deformed wing virus. However, no pathogens have been found definitively to cause the disorder. Another parasite that may play a role in CCD is the phorid fly Apocephalus borealis. A known parasite of bumblebees, A. borealis has been identified as an emerging threat to honeybees. It was first reported to infect honeybees in 2012, when it was found to be associated with hive abandonment. Honeybees from parasitized hives often are infected with Nosema species and deformed wing virus. Many phorid larvae that emerge from dead bees also are infected with those pathogens, suggesting that phorid flies may serve as a reservoir for the agents, transmitting them to bees upon parasitization.

Pesticides implicated in CCD include the neonicotinoids imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam. Although no causal link has been established, the agents have been associated with atypical honeybee behaviour and weakened immune function, which may worsen preexisting pathogen infection. For example, sublethal exposure to thiamethoxam appears to impair bees' homing ability, with consequences for colony survival, and exposure to imidacloprid and clothianidin may suppress immune function and promote the proliferation of deformed wing virus in infected honeybees. In addition, an antimicrobial agent known as fumagillin that is commonly used to control Nosema species has been shown to affect the physiology of European honeybees at concentrations that are ineffective against N. ceranae, the most invasive of the microsporidian pathogens. Because honeybees raised in brood combs with high levels of pesticide residue show increased susceptibility to N. ceranae, there is concern that pesticides and other agents, including fumagillin, could be contributing to an increase in the occurrence of N. ceranae infection.

The full sequence of the honeybee genome, which was published in late 2006, was a technological advance that could conceivably help in discovering the underlying cause of CCD in honeybees. Knowledge of the sequence made available new molecular approaches and introduced honeybee genomics to the investigation of CCD. It also enabled scientists to study the impact of the possible causal agents on specific genes and honeybee colony health. Likewise, the advance might help identify new pathogens in honeybees and unravel the complex effects of multiple combinations of pathogens and environmental toxins.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colony collapse disorder (CCD) | Definition, Causes, Effects, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Colony collapse disorder (CCD), disorder affecting honeybee colonies that is characterized by sudden colony death, with a lack of healthy adult bees inside the hive. Although the cause is not known, researchers suspect that multiple factors may be involved. The disorder appears to affect the adult

# data[].attributes.headline
How can how we solve the planet's food waste problem?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can how we solve the planet's food waste problem?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can how we solve the planet's food waste problem? - BBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The devastating effects of climate change are impossible to ignore - sea levels rising, temperatures soaring and extreme weather events of all kinds are now commonplace. Many of the factors that contribute to climate change might be difficult for us to control, but there is one action we can take that has the potential to make a significant difference - we can reduce our meat consumption.

Why Is Eating Meat Bad for the Environment?

Meat production accounts for 57 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions of the entire food production industry. It also results in widespread deforestation and loss of biodiversity, and each of these means that it significantly contributes to climate change. This is especially true of meat production from factory farming operations.

Deforestation

As increasing numbers of animals are raised for meat production, vast areas of land are being cleared for the animals to live on and their food to be grown. In the Amazon rainforest for example, 80 percent of deforestation is due to the clearing of land for cattle ranching. The deforestation caused by the animal agricultural industry results in 340 million tons of carbon being released into the atmosphere each year.

Biodiversity Loss

Much of the land that is burned and cleared for animal agriculture was once home to a variety of different plant and animal species. When these plants are destroyed and the animals have nowhere to live, this results in a loss of biodiversity - 60 percent of biodiversity loss today can be related to meat consumption. Biodiversity loss has a severely detrimental effect on an ecosystem's ability to regulate itself, so it both drives climate change and reduces the ability of ecosystems to cope with climate change.

Soil Degradation

The intensive nature of animal feed production means that areas of land used to produce crops for animal feed lose nutrients over time. As well as this resulting in a loss of soil fertility it means that the carbon dioxide that the land should be able to absorb is instead released into the atmosphere.

Water Usage

Excessive water usage may not be commonly attributed to meat production, but the animal agriculture industry uses massive amounts of water to raise and slaughter its animals.

Feed production for the animal agriculture industry is responsible for a significant amount of this water usage. Producing food for livestock requires almost 20 percent of the world's fresh water. Many of the slaughter methods used to kill the animals also use substantial amounts of water. In a single Californian slaughterhouse, for example, 4 to 5 million gallons of water are used per day to slaughter its chickens.

Compared to meat-based products, plant-based foods have a much lower water footprint. It takes six times more water to produce 1 gram of protein from beef than to get the same amount of protein from pulses.

The impacts of such extensive water usage include a loss of biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems, an increase in frequency and severity of droughts, deterioration in safe water security and a reduction in soil fertility.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Meat production significantly contributes to the release of greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. As large volumes of these greenhouse gases accumulate in the earth's atmosphere, they absorb radiation and prevent heat escaping. This leads to global warming.

Raising farmed animals in such massive numbers is among the key contributors to its greenhouse gas emissions. As ruminant animals they digest their food in a process known as enteric fermentation, which releases methane and nitrous oxide. Both of these are highly potent greenhouse gases, with methane being 27 to 30 times and nitrous oxide 273 times more effective at trapping heat than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period.

The industry is also responsible for the release of greenhouse gases through feed production, transportation of animals and emissions released by the slaughter process.

Climate Change

As forests are destroyed, soil is degraded, water reserves are depleted and large volumes of greenhouse gases are released, animal agriculture is having a devastating effect on our already struggling climate. This means that if current climate goals are to be met, there needs to be significant change in the way meat is consumed.

Why Is Meat Bad for Climate Change?

When protein sources are compared based on their greenhouse gas emissions, beef ranks the highest. The production of just 100 grams of protein from beef is responsible for the release of 49.89 kilograms of carbon dioxide. It also produces methane and nitrous oxide, which are even more powerful in trapping heat than carbon dioxide, when measured over decades.

Meat Industry Environmental Impact Statistics

Over 88 billion land animals are raised and slaughtered for food production every year.

The animal agricultural industry is responsible for at least 16.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Despite the scale of its environmental impact, animal agriculture only provides 18 percent of the calories from global food production.

Of the greenhouse gas emissions from livestock, 44 percent are in the form of methane and 29 percent in the form of nitrous oxide.

Livestock farming currently occupies more than a third of the world's habitable land area.

Depending on the type, it can take between 5,000 and 20,000 liters of water to produce 1 kilogram of meat.

Producing 1 kilogram of beef requires 25 kilograms of grain and 15,000 liters of water.

Should I Stop Eating Meat To Help the Planet?

Taking meat off your plate and making the switch to a plant-based diet is a great way to reduce your environmental impact and contribute to meaningful change. With a widespread shift toward plant-based diets, fewer animals would be raised and slaughtered, greenhouse gas emissions would fall, and the environmental impacts of our food system would be significantly reduced.

Arguments for Eating Meat

Despite the environmental implications of meat consumption, there are some who promote the regular inclusion of meat in our diets. Reasons for this include the nutrients provided by meat, and its place in cultures around the world.

The Nutritional Value

The nutritional value of meat, and the belief that it cannot be replaced in a nutritious diet, means that it is often thought to be essential for health. Different forms of meat have different nutritional values, but are all rich in protein. Many are also rich in vitamin B12 and minerals such as zinc and iron. Yet it is important to note that these nutrients can be alternatively sourced. Vitamin B12 is not naturally present in any plant-based foods, but many vegan foods are B12-fortified and it can be easily supplemented. Good sources of zinc for plant-based diets include beans, chickpeas, tofu, lentils and nuts, and iron can be found in foods including lentils, tofu, kale, apricots and linseeds.

Culture and Society

Meat is also considered by some to be an integral part of their culture. Until a few hundred years ago, however, meat consumption took place on a far smaller scale than it does today, and most people relied on plant-based foods for the majority of their nutrition.

Land Usage

The composition of some soils mean they are more conducive to producing grasses than human food crops, and not well suited to arable farming. Cattle can, however, still graze this land, meaning that the land is not being wasted and is still ultimately being utilized for food production. The scale of animal agriculture has grown beyond the use of otherwise idle land though. Currently, nearly 80 percent of agricultural land is being used for meat production. This includes land grazed by the animals themselves, and land used to grow crops for livestock feed.

Arguments Against Eating Meat

Arguments against meat consumption are strong enough that the number of people who consider themselves vegetarian or vegan has significantly increased in recent years. One study found that 39 percent of American adults limit the amount of meat they eat and are interested in one day eliminating it from their diets completely.

Health Risks

Regularly eating meat has been associated with 25 different health issues, including cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes and bowel cancer. The risk of developing many of these diseases can be lowered by substituting meat with alternative protein sources such as beans, legumes and tofu. Even switching just some of the meat products you enjoy for a plant-based option can be beneficial to your health. With the increase in availability of plant-based foods seen in recent years, it's now easier than ever for many consumers to replace meat-based products with healthier alternatives.

The environmental impacts of meat production and its contribution to climate change also make meat production as a whole a threat to human health. According to the World Health Organisation, climate change is the single largest threat to human health.

Animal Welfare

Worldwide, over 88 billion land animals are slaughtered every year for food. With increasing demand for meat, animal agriculture is becoming increasingly industrialized, resulting in large numbers of animals being kept in conditions that fail to meet their most basic welfare needs. Many of these animals are slaughtered inhumanely, meaning that the final moments of their lives are spent in physical pain and emotional distress.

Sustainability

The ecological impact of the animal agricultural industry means that its products are far from being sustainable food sources. Meat production uses up resources and releases emissions at a rate that is disproportionate to the nutrition it provides.

Environmental Impacts

The raising and slaughter of animals for their meat is causing widespread environmental impacts. These include loss of biodiversity, large volumes of greenhouse gas emissions and water pollution.

What Kind of Diet Is Best for the Environment?

To limit climate change and ensure global food security it's vital that dietary change take place on a very large scale. Because of the environmental implications of meat production, the most environmentally friendly diet is one that involves minimal or no meat consumption. One study showed that a global shift to a diet based on plants instead of meat could reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of food production by 70 percent by the year 2050.

What You Can Do

Meat consumption has such a significant impact on climate change that one of the best ways to reduce your environmental impact is to replace the meat in your diet with plant-based alternatives. If you're not ready to make a complete switch yet, reducing the amount of meat you consume is a good place to start. You can also help in the fight against climate change by educating others about the links between animal agriculture and climate change.

Most Factory Farms Have 'Free Pass' to Pollute the Environment Meat Consumption in the U.S. Is Growing at an Alarming Rate The Beef Industry's Latest Climate 'Solution': Kill Cows Younger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Is Eating Meat Bad for the Environment and Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meat consumption is contributing to the accelerating climate crisis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Almost a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions comes from agriculture and other related land use, according to the United Nations.

How much meat do we eat?

More than one billion chickens and other poultry were killed for food in the UK in 2018.

What impact does meat have on emissions

Lamb has the next highest environmental footprint but these emissions are 50% less than beef.

Cattle produce more methane than poultry, which rely more on imported feed than cows, generating a carbon footprint offshore, says Prof Margaret Gill, from University of Aberdeen.

How do you measure emissions from meat?

Measuring and comparing the environmental impact of different foods is not simple.

This is partly because some measurements include emissions from processing, packaging and transportation, rather than just the farming process.

The diagram below is based on research published in the Science journal, which estimated emissions per serving of different foods. It shows a wide range of potential environmental impact, even within the same foods, depending on how and where they are produced.

Other factors around the world vary the environmental impact. Beef production is the leading cause of deforestation in tropical rainforests such as the Amazon, says food sustainability researcher Valentina Caldart. This adds to the environmental impact of beef from that part of the world.

So, what can you do?

The true climate impact of what we eat is not easy to calculate, says Prof Gill. "Carbon footprints of food vary with how it is produced and where it comes from, and thus changes with the seasons," she says.

So, as well as cutting down on red meat and dairy, people who want to make their diets more climate-friendly can follow principles including minimising waste and trying to choose fruit and vegetables that are in season.

Prof Gill says there is: "A need for transition - albeit fairly rapid - rather than abrupt change."

What about other foods?

The biggest environmental impact of non-meat products comes from land use change, the effect on soil quality and things like transport and packaging.

Non-animal protein generally emits much less greenhouse gases than meat and dairy.

"Replacing beef with pork may sound like a good choice," says Ms Caldart. "But opting for peas instead would be even better: their production results in 90% less emissions."

What is the wider impact of what we eat?

How we produce our food does not just affect our global emissions, but has a wider environmental impact, such as on biodiversity.

"We live on a planet where nature is being squeezed out" says Mike Barrett, executive director of science and conservation at the World Wildlife Fund.

"Half of all habitable land is used for agriculture, and three-quarters of that land is used to feed and raise livestock."

Mr Barrett says: "To feed a growing world population, it's far more efficient to use land to produce crops that people can consume directly, and to have a fair global approach ensuring that parts of the world with diets high in meat and dairy shift towards more plant-based foods."

Adopting a "flexitarian" diet would also allow us to move away from factory farming with its low animal welfare standards, says Peter Stevenson, chief policy adviser to the charity Compassion in World Farming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change: Do I need to stop eating meat?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some people are switching to plant-based diets to reduce their carbon footprint.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An Earth-friendly Diet Getting Started Soy and Meatless Meat Eggs and Dairy Organic, Grass-Fed or Local? Pesticides in Meat Protein Power Food Waste Meat vs Gas Guzzlers and Climate Change
What is an Earth-friendly diet?

Our food choices don't just have an impact on our own health, but also on the health of the planet and other species. Meat production is one of the most environmentally damaging systems in the world, a major contributor to habitat loss, resource depletion, pollution and climate change. You can take steps toward an Earth-friendlier diet by eating less or no meat. You have at least three chances a day to make a difference for the environment: Choose to take extinction off your plate.

Learn more about the impact of meat production on the environment.

Is this really as important as other issues, like climate change or endangered species protection?

Meat consumption is a major driver of climate change, the extinction crisis and many other environmental problems. Animal agriculture accounts for at least 14.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions (more than cars, trains and airplanes combined). From growing feed crops to livestock grazing to handling the 500 million tons of manure generated by U.S. livestock each year, meat production destroys natural habitat and ecosystems at an alarming rate. And wildlife also pays a direct price in order to protect the meat industry's profits: Whether they pose a potential threat of preying on herds or eating livestock feed, native species are routinely killed by Big Ag, often in great numbers and ruthlessly.

How do I get started changing my diet?
Take the pledge to join the movement and commit to eating an Earth-friendly diet.
Check out our resources page to learn more and find recipes to help you get started.

Why is the Center for Biological Diversity focusing on reducing meat consumption?

When it comes to the causes of environmental destruction and overconsumption of resources, the meat industry is at the top of the list. Meat production uses massive amounts of water and land, and leaves behind devastating amounts of pollution and greenhouse gases. America's livestock industry - particularly through grazing on public lands - is one of the greatest threats to endangered species and habitat.

The United States consumes more meat than almost any other nation in the world. Every meal is an opportunity to reduce our environmental footprint, and by choosing to eat less meat, we can choose a healthier future for wildlife, the planet and people. Take our Earth-friendly Diet Pledge now.

Aren't vegetarian diets high in soy and processed foods bad for the environment, too?

Highly processed food products, including soy, do have a negative impact on the environment. Soybean plantations are responsible for deforestation, soil erosion and pesticide runoff, all of which threaten wildlife habitat and biodiversity. In some cases the carbon cost is also high as the soybeans travel from the plantations to processing centers to your grocery store. All of these environmental costs apply to meat as well, and tend to be much higher for producing animal protein than plant protein. In addition, the vast majority of soybean crops are grown for animal feed, not direct human consumption, so eating less meat will ultimately lessen the impact of soy on the planet, too.

It can be misleading to compare a plant-based diet high in soy to a meat-based diet from local, organic sources. When all things are equal - for example, comparing locally sourced meat to locally sourced vegetables - the meatless options come out far ahead for the environment and wildlife. Bottom line: The most Earth-friendly diet is plant-based from local, organic whole foods.

What about eating eggs and dairy?

All animal products have significant environmental footprints. Whether a cow is raised for hamburgers or dairy, or a chicken for meat or eggs, the animal still requires land, feed and water, and produces emissions and waste. Instead of replacing one animal product with another, we encourage people to choose plant-based alternatives.

Isn't organic, grass-fed, free-range meat better for the environment than factory farm meat?

While "grass-fed" beef is arguably more humane for livestock animals and doesn't produce the massive manure pits and runoff found at factory farms or CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations), it isn't as sustainable for wildlife or the planet as many people believe, especially when the need to feed a human population of billions is taken into account. By destroying vegetation, damaging wildlife habitats and disrupting natural processes, livestock grazing wreaks ecological havoc on riparian areas, rivers, deserts, grasslands and forests alike - causing significant harm to species and the ecosystems on which they depend. And the diets of many "grass-fed" herds are often supplemented with water-intensive crops like alfalfa. Studies have also shown that grass-fed cattle emit more methane than those raised on grain feed.

There are many important reasons to support local agriculture, but replacing meat one day per week with plant-based food saves more greenhouse gas emissions than eating an entirely local diet that includes meat.

There are simply too many people eating too much meat for any form of meat production to be considered sustainable. As population and demand continue to grow - while our natural resources dwindle - the only way to protect the environment and wildlife is to dramatically reduce meat consumption.

Are there pesticides in meat?

Cows, pigs, chickens and sheep can all be directly dosed with pesticides to prevent pest infestation in the overcrowded and unsanitary conditions that exist on factory farms. But perhaps more important is the extent to which animals are exposed to crop pesticides through their food. Pesticide residues are found in meat and animal byproducts, including, disturbingly, long-banned pesticides like DDT. So we are essentially dousing animal food with so much pesticide that the animals feeding on it can have higher levels in their tissue - what ultimately becomes a burger or steak - than plants grown for your supermarket produce department. ( Read more.)

What about eating fish?

Although many people don't consider fish to be a type of meat, when it comes to food with negative impacts on the environment and wildlife, reducing seafood needs to be part of the equation to "take extinction off your plate." Overfishing has depleted many marine species, like bluefin tuna, to the point of imperilment, putting fragile ocean ecosystems at risk. The unintentional capture of species - known as "bycatch" - is a major threat to marine life, including sharks and loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles.

Meanwhile, fish farms are just another form of feedlot, with many of the same problems seen in livestock factory farms. Farmed fish are fed wild fish, so they are closely tied to the ocean ecosystem. Fish farms are also a source of degraded habitat from dredging and drilling; water pollution from feces and chemicals; and invasive species when farmed fish escape their cages.

Learn more about the Center's fisheries campaign and join the Bluefin Boycott.

Are some types of fish more sustainable to eat than others?

Our oceans are not able to sustain the appetite of our growing global population at our current level of consumption and with our current fishing practices. By eating less or eliminating meat and fish from our diets, and choosing more plant-based meals, we can improve the health of the oceans and the planet.

For those who choose to eat fish, the most important thing is to avoid species already threatened by overfishing, like bluefin tuna. Small-scale fishing with gear that's friendly to marine mammals is preferable, but we need improve the management of fisheries worldwide to drastically reduce bycatch and overfishing before any type of fish can be considered a truly sustainable source of protein.

How will I get enough protein if I start eating more meatless meals?

A lot of people worry that they won't get enough protein if they reduce their meat consumption. But the average American eats almost twice the daily recommended intake of protein. Plus it's easy to meet your daily protein needs from plant-based sources. Nuts, beans, seeds, tofu, tempeh and quinoa are all meatless sources of protein that are easy to prepare and easy on your budget. (Choose organic where possible.) Protein can even be found in vegetables, such as spinach (2.1 grams per 2 cups raw) and broccoli (8.1 grams per one cup chopped).

What about food waste?

As much as 40 percent of food produced in the United States is thrown away. That's not only a waste of the food itself and the money spent on it, but it's also a waste of the land, water, fuel, packaging and other resources that went into producing the food in the first place. And as food decomposes, it releases methane, which directly contributes to climate change. Learn more about how food waste harms wildlife.

There are a number of ways to address food waste, from educating consumers to increasing opportunities to donate excess food and expanding composting programs. However, one of the greatest sources of agricultural waste is meat production. More than half of the grain grown in the United States is fed to livestock, and nearly half of the water used goes toward raising animals for food. Plant protein uses significantly less land, water and fossil fuels than animal protein, so by choosing to reduce your meat consumption, you're already a step ahead in reducing your overall food waste.

Why do I have to eat less meat so other people can have lots of kids or drive gas-guzzlers?

Many environmentalists underestimate the impact of reducing meat consumption. Nearly 60 percent of the carbon footprint of the average American diet comes from animal products, and meat is responsible for land degradation, water pollution, and the direct endangerment and death of wildlife.

Climate change, water scarcity, deforestation, pollution and species extinction are problems that affect all of us. We're each responsible for our own environmental footprint, but it's also important to live by example and help educate those around us on how to live more sustainably.

Check out our 12 Ways to Live More Sustainably.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meat consumption is one of the most ecologically damaging systems on the planet ... and it's one that will only get worse as the human population grows, unless we take drastic steps to change our unsustainable eating habits and adopt an Earth-friendly diet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our Senior Dietitian reveals what ultra-processed foods are, how they can affect your health, and simple ways to avoid them.

Listen to this information

Your browser does not support the audio element.

We've created this audio using our own voices with the help of AI technology.

Please help us improve your experience by answering a few questions.
Take our short survey
What's on this page?

More than half of the energy (calories) an average person in the UK eats and drinks comes from ultra-processed foods. That's perhaps not surprising as they can be convenient, appealing, and are heavily marketed to us. But researchers have shown that ultra-processed foods can impact our health. So, what are ultra-processed foods and how can we avoid them?

What is ultra-processed food?

The term 'ultra-processed foods' comes from the NOVA food classification system, which was developed by researchers at the University of São Paulo, Brazil.

The system places food into four categories based on how much they have been processed during their production:

1. Unprocessed or minimally processed foods: This includes produce such as fruit, vegetables, milk, fish, pulses, eggs, nuts and seeds that have no added ingredients and have been little altered from their natural state.

2. Processed ingredients: This includes foods that are added to other foods rather than eaten by themselves, such as salt, sugar and oils.

3. Processed foods: These are foods that are made by combining foods from groups 1 and 2, which are altered in a way that home cooks could do themselves. They include foods such as jam, pickles, tinned fruit and vegetables, homemade breads and cheeses.

4. Ultra-processed foods: Ultra-processed foods typically have five or more ingredients. They tend to include many additives and ingredients that are not typically used in home cooking, such as preservatives, emulsifiers, sweeteners, and artificial colours and flavours. These foods generally have a long shelf life.

A list of common ultra-processed foods

Examples of ultra-processed foods include ice cream, ham, sausages, crisps, mass-produced bread, breakfast cereals, biscuits, carbonated drinks, fruit-flavoured yogurts, instant soups, and some alcoholic drinks including whisky, gin, and rum.

Unprocessed or minimally processed foods: Fruit, vegetables, eggs, meat and grains.

Processed culinary ingredients: Sugar, salt, butter, lard, oils, vinegar.

Processed foods: Freshly made, unpackaged bread, tinned fruits and vegetables, salted nuts, ham, bacon, tinned fish and cheese.

Ultra processed: Ice cream, ham, sausages, crisps, mass-produced bread, breakfast cereals, biscuits, carbonated drinks, fruit-flavoured yogurts, instant soups, and some alcoholic drinks including whisky, gin, and rum.

Why are ultra-processed foods bad for us?

Ultra-processed foods often contain high levels of saturated fat, salt and sugar and when we eat them, we leave less room in our diets for more nutritious foods. It's also been suggested that the additives in these foods could be responsible for negative health effects.

The actual processing of the food could also make a difference to how our bodies respond to it. Studies have shown, for example, that when foods such as nuts are eaten whole the body absorbs less of the fat than when the nut is ground down and the oils are released. Another new theory is that diets higher in ultra-processed foods could also affect our gut health.

More research is needed to separate these different elements and understand exactly what about ultra-processed foods could be bad for our health: is it one of these elements or is it their combination?

Currently, it's also hard to know whether it is something within the foods that is the issue or whether eating a diet high in these foods suggests an overall lifestyle that is linked to poorer health. However, given the high salt, sugar, and saturated fat content of most of these foods, cutting down does seem sensible.

Want to get fit and healthy?

Sign up to our fortnightly Heart Matters newsletter to receive healthy recipes, new activity ideas, and expert tips for managing your health. Joining is free and takes two minutes.
I'd like to sign-up

Are cereal and bread considered ultra-processed foods?

When you think of ultra-processed foods, you might think of chips, sweets, and colourful sugary drinks, but there are some less obvious examples. Everyday items such as breakfast cereals and mass-produced or packaged bread can be considered ultra-processed foods. This is because they often have extra ingredients added during production, such as emulsifiers, sweeteners, and artificial colours and flavours.

One of the criticisms of the NOVA method of categorising foods is that foods like these, which can be part of a healthy diet, sit alongside less nutritious ultra-processed foods. Less nutritious ultra-processed foods can include pre-prepared meals, sausages and nuggets, as well as sweets, biscuits, pastries, buns, cakes and pre-prepared chips.

Plant-based meat and cheese substitutes are also ultra-processed, and so might not be as healthy as they are marketed to be. Despite the problems with lumping different types of food together under the umbrella term ultra-processed, the NOVA system is still widely used in research. While there are pros and cons to using it, it's helped establish a link between diets high in these foods and worse health.

Should I be cutting out ultra-processed foods?

It might sound like we should go back to eating only foods that are minimally processed, but with restricted time and budget, this isn't an option for most of us. Although the evidence to suggest that ultra-processed foods are bad for our heart and circulation seems to be growing, the type and quality of the research means it's still not clear that we need to completely exclude them.

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), who reviewed the evidence on processed foods and health this summer, concluded that because of limitations to the research available caution is still needed when it comes to making dietary recommendations.

Instead of trying to completely cut out these foods, think about the balance in your diet. Make sure that there are minimally processed foods in there too - eat fruit and vegetables with your meals and drink water instead of sugary drinks - and try to fit in time over the week for home cooking.

It's also important to remember that not all ultra-processed foods are equal. When you do include ultra-processed foods in your diet, choose those with more nutritional benefit - wholegrain bread and cereals or baked beans for example, instead of crisps, sweets or pizzas. Get in the habit of reading food labels so you can easily identify and cut back on foods that are high in sugar, salt, or saturated fat.

How to cut down on ultra-processed foods

Eating a lot of processed foods leaves less room for healthier foods like fruit and vegetables, fish, unsaturated oils, pulses and nuts and seeds. So, if you want to change your diet, try to make some swaps, such as:

Instead of flavoured yogurts with added sugar or sweeteners, choose plain yogurt and add your own chopped fresh, frozen or dried fruit for sweetness.

Instead of buying sauces or ready meals, cook your favourites in larger amounts at home and freeze the extra in portions to use another day.

Have porridge in the morning with fruit and nuts instead of sugary low-fibre breakfast cereals.

Eat fresh, baked or stewed fruit instead of shop-bought fruit pies or cakes.

Have some nuts instead of biscuits with your afternoon cuppa.

Tried to cut back?

Let us know how you got on or any tips you might have cutting back on ultra-processed foods. Email your thoughts and any photos for a chance to be featured in the next magazine.

The latest research on ultra-processed foods and heart health

Several studies have shown that eating higher amounts of ultra-processed foods is linked to a greater risk of:

One study, presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress in August 2023, tracked 10,000 Australian women for 15 years. Those with the highest amounts of ultra-processed food in their diet were 39 per cent more likely to develop high blood pressure than those with the lowest.

Another larger analysis, also presented at the meeting, looked at 10 studies involving more than 325,000 men and women. It showed that those who ate the most ultra-processed food were 24 per cent more likely to experience serious heart and circulatory events including heart attacks, strokes and angina. Each 10 percent rise in daily intake of ultra-processed food was linked with a 6 per cent increase in heart disease risk.

A study from 2019, which followed 19,899 university graduates in Spain, also showed a connection between ultra-processed foods and risk of early death. Participants were split into groups depending on their level of ultra-processed food intake. The group eating the fewest ultra-processed foods ate less than two servings per day, and the group eating the most ate more than four servings per day. People in the highest intake group were 62 per cent more likely to have died after an average of 10.4 years than people in the low consumption group.

These three studies were observational, meaning they can only find associations between factors. They can't prove that ultra-processed foods directly cause negative health outcomes like heart disease; it's possible that other factors could be responsible for the association.

In the Spanish and Australian studies, the researchers found the same increased risks after taking into consideration other aspects of people's diets, such as their saturated fat, salt and sugar intake. This suggests the processing itself may be harmful rather than the higher fat, salt and sugar levels.

BHF Senior Dietitian Victoria Taylor said: "It's important to remember that observational studies like these can only show an association. They cannot tell us what is behind this. The classification of ultra-processed foods used by the researchers is very broad and so there could be a number of reasons why these foods are being linked to increased risk to our health, for example nutritional content, additives in food or other factors in a person's life. Before we consider making any changes to advice or policy it is important to understand this thoroughly."

"We already recommend people adopt a Mediterranean-style diet, which includes plenty of minimally or unprocessed foods such as fruit, vegetables, fish, nuts and seeds, beans, lentils and wholegrains. This, along with exercising regularly and not smoking, has been shown to be beneficial for lowering risk of heart and circulatory disease."

What to read next...

Updated August 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ultra-processed foods: how bad are they for your health?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out what ultra-processed foods are, how they can affect your health, and how to avoid them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The impact of processed foods on our health and well-being - Nutrition4Kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Stan explains what you need to know about processed food and offers 14 tips on making healthy choices

# data[].attributes.headline
Food Waste causes Climate Change. Here's how we stop it.

# data[].attributes.subject
Food Waste causes Climate Change. Here's how we stop it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Food Waste causes Climate Change. Here's how we stop it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What You Could Do to Stop Colony Collapse Disorder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Death Of Bees Explained – Parasites, Poison and Humans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What would happen if everyone stopped eating meat tomorrow? - Carolyn Beans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is plant-based meat actually better for you? - Carolyn Beans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why beef is the worst food for the climate

# data[].attributes.headline
15 Best High Protein Foods That Aren't Meat

# data[].attributes.subject
15 Best High Protein Foods That Aren't Meat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
15 Best High-Protein Foods That Are Not Meat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are the impacts of ultra-processed food? | Decomplicated

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Which foods are ultraprocessed? You might be surprised.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Healthy Food Swaps You Never Thought To Try

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Environmental Impact of Diets: Meat vs. Plant-Based | Humane Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our daily food choices extend far beyond our plates, shaping the health of our planet in profound ways. While taste and nutrition often dominate dietary dec ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unit 2 The Beauty of Ugly Food (Reading Explorer 3 - 3rd Edition)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Netherlands Cuts Down on Food Waste with Public Awareness Campaign

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since 2018, the Netherlands has been using a creative campaign called United Against Food Waste to reduce household food waste.