Mexican national dietary guidelines promote less costly and environmentally sustainable diets.

The 2023 Mexican Healthy and Sustainable Dietary Guidelines (HSDG 2023) were developed to include all dimensions of sustainability. Here we compare the environmental impact and cost of diets based on the HSDG 2023, current diets and the Mexican-adapted EAT healthy reference diet. Diets following HSDG 2023 are 21% less expensive, require 30% less land to be produced and have 34% less carbon emissions than current diets-particularly in Mexico City and other urban areas with higher prevalence of Westernized diets. This is driven by reduced animal-source food, especially red meat, and ultra-processed foods. In south-rural areas, the water footprint and cost of diets following HSDG 2023 were higher than those of current diets owing to increased intake of nuts, fruits and vegetables not offset by lower meat consumption (which is already close to recommendations). Diet environmental impact and cost could be further reduced with the Mexican-adapted EAT healthy reference diet compared with the HSDG 2023.

Unar-Munguía M ，Cervantes-Armenta MA ，Rodríguez-Ramírez S ，Bonvecchio Arenas A ，Fernández Gaxiola AC ，Rivera JA ... -  《Nature Food》

Toward a healthy and sustainable diet in Mexico: where are we and how can we move forward?

Dietary recommendations worldwide have focused on promoting healthy diets to prevent diseases. In 2019, the EAT-Lancet Commission presented global scientific targets for healthy diets and sustainable food production and proposed a healthy reference diet (EAT-HRD) that can be adapted to the culture, geography, and demography of the population and individuals in any country. We aimed to describe the daily energy intake from food groups and subgroups in Mexican adults relative to the EAT-HRD and propose an adaptation of the EAT-HRD to the Mexican context. We analyzed data from the Mexican National Health and Nutrition Surveys in 2012 and 2016. Diet information was obtained using the 5-step multiple-pass 24-h dietary recall method. We estimated the mean energy intake from food groups and subgroups and compared these figures with the midpoint of the EAT-HRD and with the Mexican Dietary Guidelines (MDGs). We also proposed an adaptation of the EAT-HRD to the Mexican context based on the mean energy intake and the comparison between the MDGs and the EAT-HRD. Mexican adults consume higher than the EAT-HRD for grains (mostly refined), dairy, added sugars, and animal-based proteins (particularly red meat, poultry, eggs, and processed meats); and lower than the EAT-HRD for vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, tubers and starchy vegetables, fish, and added fats. Based on these findings, we propose a healthy and sustainable reference diet adapted for the Mexican population. Mexican adults have a diet that is far from being healthy and is not sustainable. The adaptation of the EAT-HRD to the Mexican context is a timely input for current government efforts to move to a sustainable and healthy food system, including the update of the current MDGs.

Castellanos-Gutiérrez A ，Sánchez-Pimienta TG ，Batis C ，Willett W ，Rivera JA ... -  《-》

Differences in the cost and environmental impact between the current diet in Brazil and healthy and sustainable diets: a modeling study.

While healthy and sustainable diets benefit human and planetary health, their monetary cost has a direct impact on consumer food choices. This study aimed to identify the cost and environmental impact of the current Brazilian diet (CBD) and compare it with healthy and sustainable diets. Data from the Brazilian Household Budget Survey 2017/18 and the Footprints of Foods and Culinary Preparations Consumed in Brazil database were used for a modeling study comparing the cost of healthy and sustainable diets (based on the Brazilian Dietary Guidelines (BDG) diet and the EAT-Lancet diet) versus the CBD. The DIETCOST program generated multiple food baskets for each scenario (Montecarlo simulations). Nutritional quality, cost, and environmental impact measures (carbon footprint (CF) and water footprint (WF)) were estimated for all diets and compared by ANOVA. Simple linear regressions used standardized environmental impacts measures to estimate differentials in costs and environmental impacts among diets scenarios. We observed significant differences in costs/1000 kcal. The BDG diet was cheaper (BRL$4.9 (95%IC:4.8;4.9) ≈ USD$1.5) than the CBD (BRL$5.6 (95%IC:5.6;5.7) ≈ USD$1.8) and the EAT-Lancet diet (BRL$6.1 (95%IC:6.0;6.1) ≈ USD$1.9). Ultra-processed foods (UPF) and red meat contributed the most to the CBD cost/1000 kcal, while fruits and vegetables made the lowest contribution to CBD. Red meat, sugary drinks, and UPF were the main contributors to the environmental impacts of the CBD. The environmental impact/1000 kcal of the CBD was nearly double (CF:3.1 kg(95%IC: 3.0;3.1); WF:2,705 L 95%IC:2,671;2,739)) the cost of the BDG diet (CF:1.4 kg (95%IC:1.4;1.4); WF:1,542 L (95%IC:1,524;1,561)) and EAT-Lancet diet (CF:1.1 kg (95%IC:1.0;1.1); WF:1,448 L (95%IC:1,428;1,469)). A one standard deviation increase in standardized CF corresponded to an increase of BRL$0.48 in the cost of the CBD, similar to standardized WF (BRL$0.56). A similar relationship between the environmental impact and the cost of the BDG (CF: BRL$0.20; WF: BRL$0.33) and EAT-Lancet (CF: BRL$0.04; WF: BRL$0.18) was found, but with a less pronounced effect. The BDG diet was cost-effective, while the EAT-Lancet diet was slightly pricier than the CBD. The CBD presented almost double the CF and WF compared to the BDG and EAT-Lancet diets. The lower cost in each diet was associated with lower environmental impact, particularly for the BDG and EAT-Lancet diets. Multisectoral public policies must be applied to guide individuals and societies towards healthier and more sustainable eating patterns.

Caldeira TCM ，Vandevijvere S ，Swinburn B ，Mackay S ，Claro RM ... -  《Nutrition Journal》

Towards healthier and more sustainable diets in the Australian context: comparison of current diets with the Australian Dietary Guidelines and the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet.

There is increasing focus on moving populations towards healthier and more environmentally sustainable dietary patterns. The Australian Dietary Guidelines provide dietary patterns that promote health and wellbeing. It is unclear how these guidelines align with the more recently published global recommendations of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Reference Diet, and how Australian diets compare to both sets of recommendations. Data from one 24-h recall collected for the 2011-13 National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey were analysed for 5,920 adults aged 19-50 years. Subgroups of this population were identified by diet quality and lower or higher consumption of foods often considered to be environmentally intensive (higher animal meat and dairy foods) or associated with healthiness (higher vegetables and lower discretionary choices). Food group and nutrient composition of Australian diets were compared to diets modelled on the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet. The environmental impacts of diets were estimated using an index of combined metrics. Compared with the Planetary Health Reference Diet, the Australian Dietary Guidelines contained more servings of the vegetable, dairy and alternatives, fruit, and discretionary choices. The amount of meat and alternatives was higher in the Planetary Health Reference Diet than Australian Dietary Guidelines due to the inclusion of more plant-based meat alternatives. The average Australian diet contained two to almost four times the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet maximum recommended intake of discretionary choices, and provided inadequate amounts of the vegetables, cereals, unsaturated fats and meats and alternatives food groups, primarily due to lower intakes of plant-based alternatives. The average Australian diet also contained less dairy and alternatives than the Australian Dietary Guidelines. In the average Australian diet, red meat and poultry contributed 73% to the total servings of meat and alternatives compared to 33% and 10% for the Australian Dietary Guidelines and Planetary Health Reference Diet respectively. The modelled Australian Dietary Guidelines diet met the relevant nutrient reference value for all 22 nutrients examined, whereas the Planetary Health Reference Diet contained an inadequate amount of calcium. The environmental impact scores of the Planetary Health Reference Diet and Australian Dietary Guidelines were 31% and 46% lower than the average Australian diet. Significant changes are required for Australians' dietary intake to align more closely with national and global dietary recommendations for health and environmental sustainability.

Hendrie GA ，Rebuli MA ，James-Martin G ，Baird DL ，Bogard JR ，Lawrence AS ，Ridoutt B ... -  《BMC PUBLIC HEALTH》

Sustainability of Diets in Mexico: Diet Quality, Environmental Footprint, Diet Cost, and Sociodemographic Factors.

Little is known about the current intake of sustainable diets globally and specifically in middle-income countries, considering nutritional, environmental and economic factors. To assess and characterize the sustainability of Mexican diets and their association with sociodemographic factors. Dietary data of 2,438 adults within the National Health and Nutrition Survey 2012 by integrating diet quality measured by the Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2015), diet cost, and four environmental indicators were analyzed: land use (LU), biodiversity loss (BDL), carbon footprint (CFP), and blue water footprint (BWFP). We defined healthier more sustainable diets (MSD) as those with HEI-2015 above the overall median, and diet cost and environmental indicators below the median. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of sociodemographic factors with MSD. MSD were consumed by 10.2% of adults (4% of urban and 22% of rural), who had lower intake of animal-source foods, unhealthy foods (refined grains, added sugar and fats, mixed processed dishes and sweetened beverages), fruits, and vegetables, and higher intake of whole grains than non-MSD subjects. Characteristics of MSD vs. non-MSD (urban; rural) were: HEI-2015 (62.6 vs. 51.9; 66.8 vs. 57.6), diet-cost (1.9 vs. 2.8; 1.9 vs. 2.5 USD), LU (3.3 vs. 6.6; 3.2 vs. 5.9 m2), BDL (105 vs. 780; 87 vs. 586 species × 10-10), BWFP (244 vs. 403; 244 vs. 391 L), and CFP (1.6 vs. 4.4; 1.6 vs. 3.7 kg CO2eq). Adults from rural vs. urban (OR 2.7; 95% CI: 1.7, 4.1), or from the South (OR 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1, 3.9), Center (OR 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3, 4.4) vs. the North were more likely to consume MSD, while adults with high vs. low socioeconomic status were less likely (OR 0.17; 95% CI: 0.09, 0.3). The MSD is a realistic diet pattern mainly found in disadvantaged populations, but diet quality is still sub-optimal. Increased consumption of legumes, fruits, and vegetables, and a reduction in unhealthy foods, is required to improve nutritional quality of diets while ensuring their environmental sustainability.

Curi-Quinto K ，Unar-Munguía M ，Rodríguez-Ramírez S ，Rivera JA ，Fanzo J ，Willett W ，Röös E ... -  《Frontiers in Nutrition》