ArticlePublic health nutrition2024
Environmental impact of Norwegian self-selected diets: comparing current intake with national dietary guidelines and EAT-Lancet targets.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Health and Environmental Impacts, Safety, and Affordability of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet: A Multidisciplinary Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Pooled it
- Measuring land use impacts of national dietary guidelines: a scoping review of methods, trade-offs and policy implications.Environmental research. Food systems · 2026Review
- Carbon Footprint of Childhood Diets-A Secondary Analysis of Population-Based Studies.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- The association of food consumption and macronutrient intake with dietary climate impact in Finland: considerations on the role of energy intake.Public health nutrition · 2026Article
- Relationship between nutrient profiling and environmental impacts of Norwegian dishes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Environmental impact of food consumption and sociodemographic factors in Northern Norway through an intersectional lens: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Exploring Environmental and Cardiometabolic Impacts Associated with Adherence to the Sustainable EAT-Lancet Reference Diet: Findings from the China Health and Nutrition Survey.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Food procurement in upper secondary schools in a Norwegian county: nutritional quality and environmental impacts.Food & nutrition research · 2025Article
- Nutritionally adequate, healthy, and climate-friendly diets following the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023: an optimization study for Norway.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDietary environmental impact in a Norwegian adult population was estimated for six environmental impact categories. Moreover, environmental benefits of scenario diets complying with the Norwegian Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDG) and the EAT-Lancet reference diet were assessed.
designThe current diet of Norwegian adults was estimated according to 24-h dietary recall data from a national dietary surveillance survey (Norkost 3). Scenario diets were modelled to represent the Norwegian FBDG and the EAT-Lancet healthy reference diet. Dietary environmental impact in terms of global warming potential, freshwater and marine eutrophication, terrestrial acidification, water use and transformation and use of land was estimated for the current and scenario diets using environmental impact data representative of the Norwegian market. Significant associations between impact and gender/educational attainment were assessed at
settingNorway.
participantsAdults (
resultsEnvironmental impact varied significantly by gender and educational attainment. The food groups contributing most to environmental impact of Norwegian diets were meat, dairy, beverages, grains and composite dishes. Compared with the current Norwegian diet, the FBDG scenario reduced impacts from 2 % (freshwater eutrophication) to 32 % (water use), while the EAT-Lancet scenario reduced impacts from 7 % (marine eutrophication) to 61 % (land use). The EAT-Lancet scenario resulted in 3-48 % larger reductions in impact than the FBDG scenario.
conclusionsThe Norwegian FBDG, while not as environmentally friendly as the EAT-Lancet reference diet, can still be an important tool in lessening environmental burden of Norwegian diets.
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.