Abstract

Evidence of the health and environmental harms of red meat is growing, yet little is known about which harms may be most impactful to include in meat reduction messages. This study examined which harms consumers are most aware of and which most discourage them from wanting to eat red meat. Within-subjects randomised experiment. Participants responded to questions about their awareness of, and perceived discouragement in response to, eight health and eight environmental harms of red meat presented in random order. Discouragement was assessed on a 1-to-5 Likert-type scale. Online survey. 544 US parents. A minority of participants reported awareness that red meat contributes to health harms (ranging from 8 % awareness for prostate cancer to 28 % for heart disease) or environmental harms (ranging from 13 % for water shortages and deforestation to 22 % for climate change). Among specific harms, heart disease elicited the most discouragement (mean = 2·82 out of 5), followed by early death (mean = 2·79) and plants and animals going extinct (mean = 2·75), though most harms elicited similar discouragement (range of means, 2·60-2·82). In multivariable analyses, participants who were younger, identified as Black, identified as politically liberal, had higher general perceptions that red meat is bad for health and had higher usual red meat consumption reported being more discouraged from wanting to eat red meat in response to health and environmental harms (all P < 0·05). Messages about a variety of health and environmental harms of red meat could inform consumers and motivate reductions in red meat consumption.

Highlights

  • MethodsWe pre-registered the sample size, hypotheses and analysis plan (https://aspredicted.org/ q5e9b.pdf)

  • For each of the sixteen harms, fewer than one-third of participants indicated awareness that red meat contributed to that harm (Table 3)

  • Participants were least aware that red meat contributes to stomach cancer (11 %) and prostate cancer (8 %)

Read more

Summary

Methods

We pre-registered the sample size, hypotheses and analysis plan (https://aspredicted.org/ q5e9b.pdf). We regressed the total number of harms for which participants indicated awareness on the following potential predictors: age, gender, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, income, political leaning and usual red meat consumption We used this approach to examine predictors of awareness separately for health harms v. Analyses assessed whether health or environmental harms were more effective at discouraging participants from wanting to eat red meat These analyses used a linear mixed model, regressing harm-induced discouragement ratings on an indicator variable for whether the harm was a health or environmental harm, treating the intercept as random. We used ordinary least squares linear regression to assess predictors of average discouragement These analyses assessed the same demographic predictors as for awareness and examined general perceptions that red meat is bad for health and for the environment. Analyses were conducted in 2021 using Stata MP version 16.1 (StataCorp LLC)

Results
Discussion
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call