Warnings about meat products can reduce consumption

People with cancer, rotten teeth, crying babies: shocking images on cigarette packs make clear the health consequences smokers face.

Studies from countries such as Australia and Great Britain have repeatedly proven that visual warnings work much better than purely textual warnings. Accordingly, smokers who were confronted with photos of people who were seriously ill increased their motivation to quit smoking.

So why wouldn’t this tactic also work with other products that are dangerous to health?

Now a new study suggests that similar food labeling could help people make smarter decisions – not just for their own health, but for that of the planet.

The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Durham, found that picture warnings – similar to those on cigarette packs warning of impotence, heart disease or lung cancer – can reduce the decision to eat a meat-containing meal by seven to ten. per cent.

Even this seemingly small change could have a significant impact on the future of our planet: as the British ‘Guardian’ reported, 72 percent of the British population would describe themselves as meat eaters according to a recent YouGov survey.

The Climate Change Committee (CCC), which advises the government on its net zero targets, said that to achieve this target, Britain must reduce its meat consumption by 20 percent by 2030 and 50 percent by 2050.

Jack Hughes, PhD candidate and leader of the Durham study, explained that it is clear that there are other reasons to reduce meat consumption besides the impact on the climate crisis:

To find out which warnings were likely to prompt people to reduce their meat consumption, Hughes and his colleagues divided 1,001 meat-eating adults into four groups. They showed each of these groups photos of hot meat and fish dishes, as well as vegetarian and vegan options – from burgers to quiche. In addition, the images were accompanied by a health warning, a climate or pandemic warning, or no warning.

There was a good chance that people would be put off eating meat dishes when warnings were issued about future pandemic outbreaks. Ten percent of participants chose not to eat a meat dish because of this information, followed by health warnings at 8.8 percent and climate warnings at 7.4 percent.

At the same time, however, the researchers explained that these differences were not statistically significant and that participants found the warnings about the consequences of the climate crisis to be the most credible.

The researchers believe their results can help make changes to a person’s diet that will benefit not only their own health, but also that of the planet.

Hughes told the Guardian: Achieving net zero is a priority for the nation and the planet.” And now that it has become clear that warnings can reduce the consumption of cigarettes, but also sugary drinks and alcohol, a warning on meat-containing products could also contribute to a reduction in consumption. In this way, the information can help achieve political goals regarding lower meat consumption.