Farm leaders hit back at criticisms of red meat promotion

Comparisons likening red meat to tobacco, alcohol abuse and fossil fuel use have been slammed as reckless and unjustified.   

The comparisons were drawn by a group of academics from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM).

In a report, the academics targeted farming organisations which they said used the same publicity tactics to defend meat eating as those employed by tobacco corporations.

And the academics said the tactics mimicked a well-thumbed playbook used by producers of other harmful commodities, such as alcohol and fossil fuels.

See also: QMS launches toolkit to debunk myths about red meat

Report lead author Kathryn Clare, said there was growing evidence to suggest consumption trends of red meat were a threat to human health and the planet.

“Our findings suggest that the meat industry may be using various frames that counteract this narrative,” said Dr Clare.

Another of the LSHTM authors, James Milner, said that addressing people’s appetite for meat would be crucial to avert climate breakdown.

Dr Milner called for greater scrutiny of farm industry bodies which portrayed meat eating in a positive light.

Of the bodies attacked by the report, the NFU was subjected to the heaviest criticism. But NFU deputy president Tom Bradshaw hit back, saying the LSHTM researchers had made errors and drawn unjustifiable conclusions.

Number of errors

It was reckless and unjustified for this study to compare the UK livestock sector with commodities such as tobacco and fossil fuels, Mr Bradshaw said.

Unlike red meat consumption, there was a very strong scientific consensus about harm to human health and the environment from these sectors, he said.

Mr Bradshaw added that the researchers had made a number of errors, particularly by confusing UK and global standards of production.

The Climate Change Committee has highlighted that emissions from UK beef production are less than half the global average and recognised the benefits of sustainable livestock systems, Mr Bradshaw pointed out.

And he said that livestock was often raised in areas where it was difficult to grow other foods. This could not always be said for some highly processed plant-based foods, Mr Bradshaw said.

Nutritional value

Although it was not targeted by the report, Hybu Cig Cymru (Meat Promotion Wales) said it made no sense to compare meat with harmful products that had no nutritional value, such as tobacco.

“Meat has been an important nutritious part of people’s diet for millions of years,” a spokesman told The Daily Telegraph newspaper.

“It’s widely recognised that meat in moderation can be a healthy part of a balanced diet.

“Independent scientific studies have shown that UK beef and lamb reared on non-intensive farms have a far lower emissions footprint than some of the bad environmental practices elsewhere in the world.”