WhatsNew2Day
Latest News And Breaking Headlines

World Health Organization supports support for controversial ‘planetary health diet’

The World Health Organization has withdrawn from sponsoring an event to promote a radical diet that drastically cuts meat.

The UN body intended to support the launch event of the scientific group behind the controversial “planetary health diet” rejected as “nanny-state” madness.

Scientists say the adoption is vital to feed the world’s fast-growing population without destroying the environment and improving the health of millions.

But the WHO stopped sponsoring the event after criticism that there is “no scientific justification” for everyone in the world to follow a standard diet.

A radical “planetary health diet” suggests that people should replace almost all meat and dairy products with beans, while doubling their vegetable intake. It was widely ridiculed by experts when it was announced in January. The authors now organize a series of events to promote it

The British Medical Journal first reported that the WHO had stopped the EAT Lancet Commission on Food, Planet, Health event in Switzerland.

The event – promoting a diet that was first announced in a report in January – was still going on in Geneva at the end of March. It was sponsored by the Norwegian government.

It is unclear what prompted the body to lift its sponsorship, but the views of the Italian ambassador to the UN may have played a role.

Gian Lorenzo Cornado wrote a letter to the WHO asking if the agency should support global pressure on countries to encourage the diet.

In a devastating attack, he argued that millions of people working in agriculture could lose their jobs, as well as other food areas.

Cornado also warned that the global shift to a plant-based diet could put an end to traditional cuisines around the world.

He added that in a letter from the BMJ, such a move also risked the “total elimination of consumer choice”.

And he said that the plant-based regime “also lacks nutritionally and is therefore dangerous to human health” – despite the evidence of the dangers of red meat.

The report recommends a plant-based diet based on previously published studies that have linked red meat to an increased risk of health problems. The photo above shows a vegetable burger made from wheat protein, coconut oil and potato protein

The report recommends a plant-based diet based on previously published studies that have linked red meat to an increased risk of health problems. The photo above shows a vegetable burger made from wheat protein, coconut oil and potato protein

The report recommends a plant-based diet based on previously published studies that have linked red meat to an increased risk of health problems. The photo above shows a vegetable burger made from wheat protein, coconut oil and potato protein

THE STRICT DIET THAT REQUIRES TO STORE THE PLANET

The planetary diet, which was widely laughed at at the time of the announcement, would mean a radical shift from meat, sugar, and dairy products to vegetables, beans, nuts, and legumes.

Experts say that by 2050 this would prevent around 11 million early deaths worldwide by reducing obesity, heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

But the diet would make people eat only 7 grams of pork, beef, or lamb a day – the equivalent of a quarter of a rasher of bacon or a sixteenth of a hamburger.

The average consumption of red meat in Britain should fall by 77 percent from the current 62 grams per day, according to the report prepared by 37 experts from 16 countries.

The intake of dairy and butter would be reduced by 40 percent to just 250 grams – the equivalent of half a glass of milk, a slice of cheese and a small knob of butter.

Egg consumption drops to one fifth of an egg per day, sugar intake drops by half to just 31 g per day and potato intake drops by three-quarters to 50 g.

But people who follow the planetary diet should eat three times as many vegetables, beans, nuts and soy to consume the calories.

The WHO told the BMJ that its director of nutrition – a commissioner from the EAT-Lancet group – was still a panel member at the EAT-Lancet Commission event.

But a statement said:[His] views and opinions are expressed in a personal capacity and do not necessarily reflect official WHO views.

“The WHO considers the Geneva launch event and the EAT-Lancet commission to be relevant to promoting WHO’s work on healthy nutrition.”

Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a cardiologist from NHS, said to MailOnline: “I congratulate the WHO with the support of this unscientific plant initiative.”

Two authors from the EAT-Lancet committee argued that their report “provides the most up-to-date scientific evidence for healthy nutrition”.

And they said that “nowhere” in the controversial report, first published in the prestigious journal The Lancet, is called the centralized control of the diet.

The EAT-Lancet committee organizes various events around the world in the hope of promoting the switch to plant-based foods.

The report suggested that countries could adopt laws, subsidies and penalties in the future to help them stay on the diet and save the planet.

The planetary diet, which was widely laughed at at the time of the announcement, would mean a radical shift from meat, sugar, and dairy products to vegetables, beans, nuts, and legumes.

Nutritionists expressed concern that the implementation of such radical dietary changes in different countries and cultures is irresponsible and can have unintended consequences

Nutritionists expressed concern that the implementation of such radical dietary changes in different countries and cultures is irresponsible and can have unintended consequences

Nutritionists expressed concern that the implementation of such radical dietary changes in different countries and cultures is irresponsible and can have unintended consequences

CAN FOOD SLAUGHTERS EAT HELP STORE THE PLANET?

Eating animals from ‘nose to tail’ is good for the planet because it reduces the carbon footprint of the global meat industry, scientists say.

Slaughterhouse waste refers to the internal edible parts of an animal as opposed to eating muscle tissue such as chicken fillet or steak.

It contains remains such as tongue, tripe, brain and heart parts of animals that are often malignant from menus because they seem unpalatable.

A new study, however, encourages the use of every part of the animal to reduce greenhouse gases, which account for around 24 percent, according to a UN study last year.

Making sure we use every part of the animals that are kept for slaughter is as good as reducing or reducing waste and breeding fewer animals, the researchers said.

Although our desire for meat shows no signs of delay, even with the increase in veganism, meat production remains a billion-dollar industry.

Experts say that by 2050 this would prevent around 11 million early deaths worldwide by reducing obesity, heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

But the diet would make people eat only 7 grams of pork, beef, or lamb a day – the equivalent of a quarter of a rasher of bacon or a sixteenth of a hamburger.

The average consumption of red meat in Britain should fall by 77 percent from the current 62 grams per day, according to the report prepared by 37 experts from 16 countries.

The intake of dairy and butter would be reduced by 40 percent to just 250 grams – the equivalent of half a glass of milk, a slice of cheese and a small knob of butter.

Egg consumption drops to one fifth of an egg per day, sugar intake drops by half to just 31 g per day and potato intake drops by three-quarters to 50 g.

But people who follow the planetary diet should eat three times as many vegetables, beans, nuts and soy to consume the calories.

The authors emphasize that the world’s population is expected to reach ten billion by 2050, and the earth has finite resources for food production.

They say a billion people are already malnourished and another two billion are overeating the wrong food.

Previous studies have shown that meat uses 83 percent of the world’s agricultural land, while it supplies only 18 percent of calories.

Dr. Walter Willett, of Harvard Medical School, one of the lead authors of the report funded by the Wellcome Trust, said in January that the diet is feasible.

He added: “We are not talking about hardship here. We are talking about a way of eating that can be pleasant and tasteful. “

Dr. Willett added that the diet may seem small for people in the US and the UK, but not for people in a “very large part of the world” who eat so much meat every day.

Professor Tim Lang, of City, University of London, also said: “The food we eat and how we produce it determines the health of people and the planet.

“And we are seriously wrong at the moment. We need a major overhaul that will change the global food system on an unprecedented scale. “

But Christopher Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the Free Market Institute of Economic Affairs, said, “They say,” You are what you eat, “and that must be true, because this is crazy.

“Most people will look at these demands and smile, but I welcome this report because it reveals the full agenda of campaigners.”

.