Not a yes/no discussion about meat, but a discussion based on facts about the extent to which consumers who want to eat meat can do so sustainably. Is a balance possible between nutritional value and climate pressure, so that meat fits into a healthy and sustainable diet? The participants in the annual Meat Café, which the Central Organisation for the Meat Sector (COV) organised for the third time at Dudok Studio in The Hague on Wednesday 13 November, spoke about this.
The fact is that determining the impact of the production and consumption of meat has a high degree of complexity. This has led to a considerable polarisation of the public debate on meat in recent years between supporters and opponents of meat. "Meat is often wrongly dismissed as unhealthy and unsustainable," says Jos Goebbels, chairman of the Central Organisation for the Meat Sector COV.
"However, meat has a high nutritional value. That perspective is important in assessing the environmental footprint of meat. Certainly, it is complex. But as COV, we like to take up the challenge of talking to everyone about the function of meat in a responsible diet. But on the basis of facts."
That is why COV organised the third edition of its Meat Café on Wednesday 13 November 2019. The venue was Studio Dudok in the heart of The Hague and the subject was 'The role of meat in a healthy and sustainable diet'. COV invited a diverse group from the food industry, the meat sector, food service & retail, agriculture, social organisations, research institutes, policy makers and the media. Some 75 participants listened to four speakers who went into greater depth on the themes of nutritional value, environmental footprint, consumer behaviour and the market. After the speakers had been critically questioned by an expert panel, the participants were given the opportunity to speak for themselves. This was done in an animated House of Commons debate led by debate leader Gijs Weenink, director of the Debat Academie.
Stephan Bakker, professor of internal medicine at UMC Groningen, talked about the nutritional value of meat and vegetable alternatives. He indicates that animal tissue contains specific nutrients such as creatine and haem, which are formed by enzymes that are lacking in plants. Usually this has no noticeable consequences, but that can change if a person's state of health deteriorates, or if the organ that produces certain necessary enzymes functions less well. "Hence the need to consume animal proteins. Since creatine is the energy carrier of choice in muscles, heart and brain, it is conceivable that a deficiency in it will contribute to fatigue, muscle weakness and reduced cognitive function". Patients are more likely to suffer from this than those without health problems. "We live in an ageing society", says Stephan Bakker. " The kidney function also decreases with ageing, which increases the chance that insufficient nutrients will be produced."
"To what extent is meat an important nutrient for malnutrition", says Karine Hoenderdos, dietician at Scriptum. "Malnutrition is often caused by loss of organ function," says Stephan Bakker. "The kidneys and the liver are very important, but also the small intestine. It often happens that patients who undergo chemotherapy do not produce citruline for a while. They too will be dependent on meat as a source of food to meet that nutritional need."
"When kidney function is impaired, the advice is precisely to avoid eating too much protein", says panel member Annet Roodenburg, lecturer in nutrition and health at the HAS University of Applied Sciences in Den Bosch. "What about that?
"It's a question of whether that advice is correct," answers Bakker. "A protein-restricted diet reduces muscle mass and that distorts the picture. Then the kidney seems to function better, but that is often not the case. Protein is needed to repair organ damage. Animal protein is better able to do this than vegetable protein, because animal protein contains more so-called secondary metabolites".
Hans Blonk, director of Blonk Consultants, shows to what extent meat can fit into a sustainable diet. He does this by relating the climate impact to the total package of nutrients that a consumer needs. This shows that it is difficult to include beef in a sustainable diet. "You can eat healthy and sustainable food with or without meat," says Blonk. "If you want to strike a good balance between nutritional value and environmental impact, then for nutritional value you have to include at least 50 to 60 nutrients in your consideration. We have developed a method for this that is called Optimeal. This shows that you can also have a sustainable diet when eating poultry or pork. This is much more difficult with beef, although it should be borne in mind that a small proportion of the beef is more or less free to go along with dairy consumption. On the other hand, certain meat substitutes do not come out of the equation either. According to Blonk, more environmentally friendly production and a critical choice of ingredients for the necessary nutrients are preconditions for an optimal balance between sustainability and health.
Annet Roodenburg: "What nutritional deficiencies should you pay particular attention to if you don't eat meat?
Hans Blonk: "Iron and vitamin B12 are critical. In the sustainable diet for women, more meat remains present because of their higher iron requirements. Age also plays a role. Zinc is also an important substance to keep an eye on."
Karine Hoenderdos: "I miss the category 'meuk' in the picture. Stuffed cakes, ham-cheese croissants, crisps, that kind of work. What happens if we remove that itch from our diet?"
Hans Blonk: "A justified question. In the debate, disproportionate attention is paid to whether or not to eat meat. Those filled cakes are of course bad, but sometimes meuk also has a good score at Optimeal. A good example is well-prepared fries."
Hilje van der Horst, University Lecturer in Consumption & Healthy Lifestyles at the WUR, explained consumer behaviour in terms of the role of meat in the food culture. According to her, consumers know too little about the health aspects of meat and the impact of meat on the environment. In addition, consumers have very limited knowledge of how to adapt their eating habits. Moreover, motivating consumers to switch to a more sustainable and healthy consumption pattern will only reach a part of the population. Some consumers may, on the contrary, consume more meat. Contradictions within society can harden. What does work, however, is gradually building broad support for a diet with more vegetable protein and less meat, and a more sustainable production of meat.
Karine Hoenderdos: "How do you prevent polarisation in the debate on food and meat in particular?"
Hilje van der Horst: "Flexitarians who eat less meat are leading the way. Support for a food system in which vegetable protein plays a greater role and in which meat consumption mainly comes from sustainable production must gradually be broadened".
Martijn Bouwknegt, research manager at Vion, shows how Vion responds to questions about the sustainability of the market and society. Consumers have many different wishes with regard to their food. Animal welfare, sustainability, health and transparency are of great importance. Science has shown that there are major differences in terms of sustainability between and within types of meat. He emphasises that Dutch animal husbandry is a global leader in sustainability. By making a quality such as sustainability visible on food, consumers can make their own and fair assessment. According to him, the meat chain can play an excellent role in allowing consumers to make an honest choice for their food by being transparent about sustainability and animal welfare, for example.
Annet Roodenburg: "You say that the meat producer can control the chain. But doesn't the supermarket decide what's on the shelves?"
Martijn Bouwknegt: "The important thing is that, in dialogue with the chain partners, you can achieve added value together. Among other things, we have good contacts with our suppliers, the cattle farmers. In this way, together with the retail sector, we can serve the consumer."
Karine Hoenderdos: "Is the price of meat fair?"
Martijn Bouwknegt: "A fair price is very important. The Beter Leven quality mark is a good example of a fair pricing system, with a surcharge for the extra efforts made by the chain partners. However, we have not yet reached the point where we have a standardised, transparent and unambiguous method for converting the total climate impact of our food into a price. But Vion is certainly in favour of such fair prices, should the method be developed."
In an animated House of Commons debate, various propositions were discussed. Some of the propositions are explained in more detail below.
The majority of those present were in favour, mainly because of consumers' need for reliable and independent sources of information. One opponent felt that the entire 5-disc was outdated. Other opponents argued that reducing meat consumption is healthier. One of the participants referred to Canada as an example of a country that has adapted its own 5-slice Food Guide. Although this participant stated that meat is no longer included in the Food Guide, it turns out that meat is still part of the recommended sources of protein.
The supporters are clearly in the majority. Whole generations have grown up with meat as part of the menu, and for many this remains an important part of the consumption pattern. According to an advocate, it is above all easier for consumers who otherwise have to think too much about an alternative. An opponent points out that meat is so dominant that it is at the expense of the choice of fruit and vegetables. In addition to too little fibre, many carnivores eat too much salt and fat, which is not healthy. This is contested by various supporters of this thesis.
Again, there are more supporters of this proposition than opponents in the room. Meat is full of valuable nutrients that the body can absorb well, says one of them. Eaten in the right proportions, it is healthy and sustainable. Another supporter points out that the Netherlands is at the forefront of animal welfare and food safety. One opponent sees it from an international perspective: eating more meat worldwide is not sustainable on the current scale. One advocate emphasises the nuance. According to this participant, it is not about whether or not to eat meat, but about the amount of meat you consume as a meat-eater. The role of animals in the nutrient cycle is also important. They are necessary in the conversion of nitrogen, potassium and phosphate. Otherwise, arable farmers will have to rely on artificial fertiliser, which is not sustainable at all, according to this advocate.
Here the opponents are in the majority. Especially the obligatory character meets with a lot of resistance. Another obstacle is the lack of consensus on the measurement method for determining the climate footprint. An opponent points out that the environment cannot be isolated from other values such as animal welfare and health. It is too much for the consumer to choose from. One advocate argues that this information on environmental impact does make consumers more aware of the differences between the various dishes, but in general those present feel that the responsibility for this choice should not be placed with the consumer.
Source: © COV Meat Cafe
Magazine Voedingsindustrie has been made possible in part by:
© COPYRIGHT 2024 VOEDINGSINDUSTRIE | ALLE RECHTEN VOORBEHOUDEN
Powered by Wallbrink Crossmedia © 2024
