Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38891709›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Animal Lives Affected by Meat Consumption Trends in the G20 Countries.

Sytske van der Laan, Gerard Breeman, Laura Scherer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. MitigatingMicroorganisms · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sytske van der LaanInstitute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, 2333 CC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Gerard BreemanInstitute of Public Administration, Leiden University, P.O. Box 13228, 2501 EE Den Haag, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9735-4689
Laura SchererInstitute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, 2333 CC Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0194-9942

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trends in dietary habits have far-reaching implications, but their impact on animals remains insufficiently explored, as many people continue to dissociate meat from individual animal lives. This research study quantifies the temporal development of the number of animal lives affected by meat consumption within the G20 countries between 1961 and 2020 and forecasts for 2030. Production (including slaughter) and historical and projected food balance data were analyzed to explore these trends. The results indicate an increase in the number of animal lives affected due to increasing consumption, but discrepancies exist between different countries and animal categories. Increases are stronger in emerging countries, such as China, than in more industrialized countries, such as Germany. Overall, the number of animals affected grows 1.7 times as fast as meat consumption due to a shift towards poultry. Poultry birds are affected by far the most, and their dominance in number only slightly reduces when considering the differentiated moral values of the animals, reflecting their sentience. Until 2030, we can expect further increases in the number of animal lives affected. The findings highlight the need for progressive legislation to address the complex trade-offs and challenges in reversing the increasing trends in the number of animals affected.

Indexed as

animal farming governanceanimal-source foodsanimal welfareforecastlivestocktemporal development

Identifiers

PMID38891709
PMCPMC11171019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.