ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
The neglected potential of red and processed meat replacement with alternative protein sources: Simulation modelling and systematic review.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of taxes and warning labels on red meat purchases among US consumers: A randomized controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2023Trial
- Dietary Intake of Plant-Based Meat Consumers-A Cross-Sectional Analysis Based on the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (Years 2014-2019) in the United Kingdom.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- Alternative protein-based foods must contribute to micronutrient adequacy.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Article
- Nutrient-adequate diets with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions or price are the least acceptable-insights from dietary optimisation modelling using the iOTA modelFrontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Ruminations on sustainable and safe food: Championing for open symbiotic cultures ensuring resource efficiency, eco-sustainability and affordability.Microbial biotechnology · 2024Article
- Sustainability benefits of transitioning from current diets to plant-based alternatives or whole-food diets in Sweden.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Legumes: A Vehicle for Transition to Sustainability.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Government inaction and the preventable diabetes pandemic.Nature medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: What we eat is fundamental to human and planetary health, with the current global dietary transition towards increased red meat intakes and ultra-processed foods likely detrimental. Methods: We modelled five red and processed meat replacement scenarios to consider health, equity, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe), and cost outcomes using an established multistate life table model using data from New Zealand as a case study of a developed, westernised country. Current red and processed meat intakes were replaced with: minimally or ultra-processed plant based meat alternatives, cellular meat, or diets in line with EAT-Lancet or Heart Foundation recommendations on red meat intake. We then conducted a systematic review of literature from database inception to 14 November 2022 to identify implemented population-level meat replacement strategies which could inform evidence-based recommendations to achieve any benefits observed in modelling. PROSPERO CRD42020200023. Findings: When compared with current red and processed meat intakes, all red and processed meat replacement scenarios were nutritionally adequate and improved overall Quality Adjusted Life Years (159-297 per 1000 people over life course for the five scenarios modelled). Age standardised per capita health gain for Māori was 1.6-2.3 times that of non-Māori. Health system cost savings were $2530-$5096 per adult, and GHGe reduced 19-35%. Finally, grocery cost varied (↓7%-↑2%) per modelled scenario when compared with baseline costs. The greatest benefits for all outcomes were achieved by meat replacement with minimally-processed plant-based foods, such as legumes. The systematic review identified only two implemented population-level strategies to reduce meat intakes within the academic literature. Interpretation: All meat replacement scenarios considered indicated appreciable health gains and GHGe reductions. Replacement with minimally-processed plant-based foods appeared consistently superior than other scenarios. Evidence of real-world population strategies to achieve these benefits however is currently lacking. Funding: Healthier Lives National Science Challenge (Grant UOOX1902).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.