Population group differences in subjective importance of meat in diet and red and processed meat consumption

Abstract

Red and processed meat (RPM) consumption associates directly with several unfavorable health outcomes and with environmental impact of diet. RPM consumption differs between certain population groups, and moreover, encompasses various subjective meanings. Literature on determinants of subjective importance of meat in diet (SIM), however, is scarce. Aims of this study were to determine which sociodemographic and -economic characteristics associate with SIM and RPM consumption. The study was based on the FinHealth 2017 Study. The sample comprised 4671 participants aged 18–74 years. SIM was asked with a question including five response options from “not important at all” to “very important”. Habitual dietary intake including RPM consumption was studied with a food frequency questionnaire. RPM consumption level grew in parallel with SIM categories. RPM consumption was high and SIM prevailing in men, those living in rural areas, and those with low education. Women living in household with children consumed more RPM than other women but did not find meat more important. Conversely, men living in household with children found meat more important but did not consume it more than other men. Domain analyses considering individuals within the highest RPM consumption quintile revealed that the oldest age group found meat significantly less important than the youngest group. In order to be able to lower RPM consumption at population level and to move towards healthier and climate-wiser diets, it is important to identify subgroups that consume much meat but also subgroups that find meat especially important. Such dietary transition may be especially challenging to subgroups that consume much meat and also consider it important. Actions to support the dietary transition in different population groups should be developed.