Over two dozen US Representatives have urged the Bureau of Prisons to offer more plant-based meat options to inmates in federal prisons.

A group of lawmakers in the US are calling for federal prisoners to be provided with more meatless options, highlighting better health outcomes for inmates and lower costs for prisons.

In a letter addressed to the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), 26 House Democrats from across the US – led by California Representatives Adam Schiff and Julia Brownley – are urging the federal agency to include more meatless foods for breakfast and ensure healthier vegetarian choices on its national menu.

Currently, the BOP’s Food Service Manual requires a “no-flesh” (meat-free) option at both noon and evening meals, but the policymakers – including Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, Jamie Raskin, Jamaal Bowman and Jan Schakowsky – believe further action to support plant-forward dining options could “improve inmate health, lower dining costs, and better meet the diverse dietary needs of inmates”.

“Expanding access to plant-based dining options at all mealtimes will give inmates meaningful options through which they can exert control over their own health,” said Madeline Bennett, a food system and nutrition policy analyst at public health non-profit Balanced.

“Though plant-based meals are no panacea, inmates’ having consistent access to such options would be an impactful corrective to the current insufficiencies of federal prison food service,” she added.

The letter was supported by Balanced, climate NGO Friends of the Earth, food policy non-profit Food Solutions Action, and health organisation the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM).

Vegan options lead to ‘better health outcomes’ for inmates

Health is a major focus in the letter, speaking to national trends. A 2024 survey by the International Food Information Council found that 55% of Americans eat meat-free diets out of health concerns. And a similar poll by 84.51° in May revealed that health is the most important driver of plant-based meat consumption in the US.

“Expanding access to plant-based options is a pathway to better health outcomes for inmates. As you know, federal prisons house inmates who suffer from chronic and diet-related health conditions at or above the rates among age-, race-, and sex-matched populations within the general public,” the letter reads.

“However, inmates have far lower access to both preventive lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatments while in prison, which together contribute to excess mortality from nearly all major causes of death in the years following their release.”

The Representatives cite a 2016 government survey that found 33% of federal prisoners have a chronic health condition. “Consuming meals focused on plant-based foods offers nutritional and health benefits, as they contain less saturated fat and sodium than animal products, are higher in dietary fibre, and do not contribute to non-communicable diseases like heart disease and type 2 diabetes,” the lawmakers write in what is a strong endorsement of vegan diets.

“Inmates in federal prisons have little to no control over their diets and therefore diminished agency to make positive health changes – even though they suffer the same or higher rates of diet-related diseases as the non-incarcerated,” explained Bennett.

“Providing plant-based meals in prisons is the prescription for helping inmates prevent and treat diet-related diseases like diabetes and heart disease,” added PCRM Neal Barnard.

Religious and dietary inclusivity with plant-based food

There’s a focus on the need to better meet religious requirements, allergies, and food intolerances in prisons. The lawmakers note how “plant-based dining options are one of the few cuisines that will consistently meet” the dietary requirements of inmates following a Halal or Kosher diet.

Meanwhile, according to the National Institutes of Health, 95% of Asian Americans, 60-80% of African Americans, 80-100% of Indian Americans, and 50-80% of Hispanic people in the US are lactose intolerant, and plant-based options could better accommodate their needs.

“Given the extent to which these groups are overrepresented among inmate populations, BOP could take an important step forward,” the letter reads.

Vegan diets could further offer healthier choices to people suffering from an emerging disease called Alpha-Gal Syndrome. Associated with allergic reactions to beef and pork consumption, this now affects nearly half a million Americans.

Vegan meals lower prison food costs

It’s just not inmates who would benefit from more plant-based food. These meals could be cost-effective for prisons themselves too.

Taking a leaf out of the healthcare sector’s “forward-thinking” playbook, the Representatives cite an analysis by plant-based advocacy organisation Greener by Default. The non-profit assessed data based on a hospital with 350 beds and 5,000 staff members and found that moving to a ‘plant-based by default’ (where vegan options are the norm, not the alternative) would reduce food costs for patients by $0.75 per meal over six months, and $0.65 over a five-year period.

“While this calculation reflects the direct savings to the hospital’s food programme, it does not include more savings that in the context of a prison could relate to health improvements, behavioural incident reduction, less need for costly healthcare interventions, etc.,” the policymakers point out.

As a successful example, they add that upon adopting a default plant-based approach, the New York Health + Hospital saw cost savings of 59% per tray, with satisfaction rates among patients above 90%. New York, California and Maryland have all considered or adopted legislation that calls on prisons to increase plant-based options.

The Representatives requested information from the BOP to better understand its food policy and how they can support it. This includes questions about the inclusion rates of plant-based meals, the cost difference between animal-derived and vegan foods, whether inmates need to have a dietary restriction on file, and the barriers that prevent the BOP from serving more plant-based food.

They also say they’d support having the Food Service Manual encourage federal prisons to use plant-based proteins and set requirements to meet religious dietary needs.

“Every person deserves the right to choose a healthy, culturally appropriate, plant-based meal – including those who are incarcerated in federal prisons,” said Lisa Gonzalez, senior food and climate policy analyst at Friends of the Earth.

The post US House Reps Write to Bureau of Prisons to Increase Plant-Based Meals for Inmates appeared first on Green Queen.

This post was originally published on Green Queen.

A majority of UK residents would support a tax on companies that make ultra-processed food. With rising costs for the NHS, it’s important to note vegan food can be the solution, not the problem.

As ultra-processed foods (UPFs) continue to creep into consciousness and our bodies, consumers in the UK are calling for government action to combat the country’s obesity issue.

A new 2,136-person survey by Ipsos for the UK’s Health Foundation has found that 53% of Brits are in favour of a tax on companies that produce UPFs, if some of the revenue is directed to funding fresh fruits and vegetables for low-income families.

Similarly, 58% support a tax on foods that are high in sugar and salt, as long as some of the revenue helps provide fresh produce to low-income households.

In the UK alone, UPFs make up 57% of an average person’s diet, and up to 80% when it comes to children or people with lower incomes. Likewise, around two-thirds of calories consumed by adolescent Brits come from UPFs.

One in three children in Britain are overweight or living with obesity by the time they leave primary school, while over a third are at risk of developing a food-related illness in the future. Meanwhile, 95% are exceeding the daily recommended amount of sugar, and 66% are doing so for salt. And only 9% aren’t eating enough fruits and vegetables.

The new Labour government has promised to clamp down on obesity by banning junk food ads on TV before 9pm (something 61% of the survey’s respondents support) and the sale of energy drinks to people under 16.

Whether it enforces a tax on UPFs – a la the soft drinks levy introduced by the Conservatives in 2018 – remains to be seen. But the conversation around UPFs needs to be more nuanced, especially when you consider plant-based food, which can help the cash-strapped National Health Service (NHS) tremendously.

The problem with linking UPFs, nutrition and plant-based meat

A quick recap: UPFs are part of the Nova classification, which categorises food into four subgroups, based on the amount of processing (it has nothing to do with the nutrition aspect of a food). UPFs are at the bottom rung of the ladder, comprising industrial formulations and techniques like extrusion or pre-frying, and cosmetic substances like high-fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils

Broadly speaking, this can include anything from ice creams, cereals and flavoured yoghurts to hot dogs, fizzy drinks, and plant-based meats.

But the conversation around veganism and its link to UPFs has been at best unfair, and at worst dangerous. Many have misinterpreted the idea that just because a food is ultra-processed, it’s unhealthy. A swathe of media outlets have taken that cue to denounce meat analogues, something that heightened after a recent study by the São Paulo University and Imperial College London.

The researchers labelled UPFs as a cause of heart disease, and headline writers jumped on the fact that this analysis included vegan meat analogues – notwithstanding the fact that these only made up 0.2% of the foods in the study, or that these were products that existed in 2010. In reality, the UPFs that were linked to cardiovascular disease were packaged breads, cakes, and biscuits.

One widely cited review linked UPFs to 32 harmful health effects. But many other UPFs, like cereals, dark or whole-grain bread, packaged sweet and savoury snacks, fruit-based products, and yoghurt and dairy-based desserts were inversely associated with ill health in the same study. Most of these products are technically plant-based.

These studies highlighted a key fallacy of the UPF nutrition debate. What really classifies as UPFs? According to the Imperial College/São Paulo research, beer, wine, pasta, cereals, table sugar and cheese were all non-UPFs, but tofu – made in a similar manner to many cheeses – somehow was deemed ultra-processed.

Marlana Malerich, co-founder at the Rooted Research Collective and a food systems researcher with expertise in UPF, told Green Queen in June that even experts disagree on the Nova system: “A study found only around 30% agreement on the placement of foods within Nova categories among food experts, suggesting the food categorisations used across studies almost certainly use different criteria for different foodstuffs.”

Plant-based foods can benefit the NHS

It is true that many UPFs aren’t good for you. I don’t think any manufacturer of a mass-produced cola drink or ice cream would disagree with that.

But as Malerich told Green Queen in March, it doesn’t mean every UPF is bad for you. “It’s crucial to recognise the limitations of the Nova system, which does not account for nutritional content, leading to potential misclassification,” she explained.

This is why Dr Chris van Tulleken, author of Ultra-Processed People – the book that amplified the conversation around UPFs last year – said a blanket tax on UPFs would be wrong and harmful.
“We can regulate individual products much more effectively,” he told the Guardian. “The companies that make UPFs privatise the benefits and externalise all these costs so whether we like it or not, we will have to pick up the bill.”

Another organisation burdened with a huge bill is the NHS, which spends £98B a year on obesity, including £6.5B on treating illnesses associated with being overweight, like heart disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes and joint problems.

Research by the UK’s Office of Health Economics has estimated that if England were to adopt a completely plant-based diet, the NHS would see a net benefit of up to £18.8B a year. The health service has embraced meat analogues, partnering with Quorn – whose products are technically UPFs, but nowhere near as bad for you as processed and red meat, which have been classed as carcinogens by the WHO – for blended burgers and sausages.

One modelling study, meanwhile, shows that a ‘plant-based by default’ approach could save the NHS £74M annually, with significant household savings too if patients are supported in making dietary shifts.

And 35% of Brits would support the NHS going fully vegan, though the same number are okay with patients being served processed meat. This highlights the conundrum: there’s a lot of paradoxical information, and consumers are understandably confused.

A quarter (24%) of respondents to the Health Foundation survey are against a UPF tax. A levy on these foods will have its advantages, but as van Tulleken suggested, it will only work if individual products are taxed.

Coke is plant-based. So is an apple. They’re not the same thing.

The post 53% of Brits Want Taxes on Ultra-Processed Foods, But Separating Them From Plant-Based is Crucial appeared first on Green Queen.

This post was originally published on Green Queen.

Norway is the latest European country to advocate for a plant-forward diet in its national dietary guidelines – but its recommended meat intake is still high, since it doesn’t factor in climate impact.

In a year when Austria and Germany have already updated their food-based dietary guidelines to promote a predominantly plant-based diet, Norway has become the latest to join the bandwagon.

The Nordic country has cut its recommended amount of red meat consumption by 30%, from 500g to 350g per week. And instead of advising Norwegians to only opt for lean meat or fish instead, the Norwegian Directorate for Health now endorses plant proteins and meat analogues too.

“Feel free to choose legumes such as beans, lentils and peas for dinner at least once a week, and as a side dish or spread,” the new guidelines read. “Processed legume products such as vegetarian burgers, sausages and falafel should contain little salt and fat.”

And crucially, the health directorate suggests that “a healthy and varied vegetarian or vegan diet that covers energy needs will also contain sufficient protein”.

Norway endorses plant proteins and dairy analogues

“A healthy and varied diet can be put together in many ways and adapted to different cultures, traditions and ways of life. The most important thing is that it is varied and consists mostly of food from the plant kingdom,” the guidelines note.

This includes foods like vegetables, fruits, whole grains, beans, lentils, peas and nuts. Just like its counterparts in Germany and Austria, the Norwegian Directorate for Health proposes a ‘plate model’ with 50% fruits and vegetables, and 25% carbohydrates and proteins each.

“To eat more plant-based, beans, lentils and peas can easily replace all or some of the meat in dishes such as stews, soups, meat mixes, lasagne or tacos,” the new guidelines say. “Use beans, lentils and peas and their products, such as hummus, bean and lentil paste, tofu and other soy products in salads, or as a topping.”

The recommendations note how legumes contain dietary fibre, protein, iron, zinc and other nutrients, and a high intake can protect against cancer and reduce mortality: “In a vegetarian or vegan diet, beans, lentils, peas, nuts and seeds will be good sources of protein and other nutrients.”

And while the previous version didn’t mention dairy alternatives, the updated edition states that “plant-based drinks can contribute many of the same nutrients”, and recommends choosing products that have added calcium, iodine, riboflavin and vitamin B12.

Moreover, Norwegians are advised to choose unsaturated vegetable oils and soft margarine instead of butter, hard margarine and tropical oils like coconut and palm, as well as eat 20-30g of unsalted nuts every day.

Ignoring environmental impact a big miss amid high climate denial

The Norwegian food-based dietary guidelines recognise that red meat consumption is linked with increased risks of colon and rectal cancer: “Both a high intake of red meat and a high intake of processed meat are among the four highest diet-related risk factors for the burden of disease in the Nordic and Baltic countries.”

But the recommended amount of 350g per week is still much higher than what’s stipulated in the EAT-Lancet Commission’s Planetary Health Diet, which is associated with a 30% lower risk of death from all causes and a 17% reduction in global food emissions. It suggests limiting red meat to just 98g a week, 72% less than Norway’s latest guidelines.

This is because the Norwegian Directorate for Health is solely focusing on nutrition and health, instead of also taking climate impacts into account – something that both Germany and especially Austria have done.

This is a surprising contrast to the 2023 Nordic Nutrition Recommendations – a joint dietary guideline for the Nordic nations – which integrate environmental aspects to align with the Nordic Vision to “be the most sustainable and integrated region” globally by 2030.

The collaborative Nordic advice promotes a predominantly plant-based diet rich in produce, berries, legumes, and whole grains. “We cannot, and will not, turn a blind eye to the scientific evidence of how our consumption impacts our planet,” the guideline states.

Ignoring the planetary impact of the food system – where meat and dairy make up 57% of emissions, twice as much as plant-based foods – is concerning for a country where climate denial is high. A study published in 2018 suggested that 36% of the population think climate change is a hoax. Despite the crisis worsening since then, these sentiments are still high, with recent analysis of a 2023 survey suggesting that 27% of Norwegians are either doubtful or dismissive of climate change.

So while the inclusion of plant proteins and meat and dairy analogues is a good first step, a lot more needs to be done to account for climate change in Norway’s dietary guidelines.

The post Norway Advises Eating ‘Mostly Plant-Based Food’ in New Dietary Guidelines, But Ignores the Climate appeared first on Green Queen.

This post was originally published on Green Queen.

Austria’s new dietary guidelines recommend eating less animal protein and more plants, with pulses getting their own category for the first time.

Eat less meat and dairy – and for your protein needs, choose mostly plant-based. That’s the gist of Austria’s updated national dietary guidelines, joining a growing list of countries championing a shift away from animal-based foods for a healthy and sustainable food system.

And for the first time, the dietary recommendations have a dedicated section for pulses, legumes and their products, such as tofu, tempeh, soy milk and yoghurt, etc.

The new guidelines are based on a ‘plate model’ that advises a diet of 50% fruits and vegetables, 25% whole grains and potatoes, and a further 25% proteins, mostly plant-based. Meat, fish, milk and dairy should be reduced.

“[The guidelines] show people how to make their diet healthier and more environmentally conscious,” said social affairs minister Johannes Rauch. “A conscious diet with a focus on vegetables, fruits, grains, and legumes is not only good for the planet, but it also helps us live longer and healthier.”

Food’s climate impact necessitated ‘plate model’

Austria’s updated dietary recommendations were developed by the health ministry in collaboration with the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety and the Austrian Society for Nutrition, which took both health and climate aspects into account.

The ministry explains that the existing version was presented in the form of a food pyramid and considered evidence-based recommendations on nutrient intake and findings on the prevention of diet-related diseases. But current developments – especially the food system being a driver of climate change – mandated an expansion to include climate and health parameters.

“Of all foods, meat and dairy products burden the climate the most,” reads an accompanying cookbook based on the plate model. “The production of meat, milk, cheese, and eggs is responsible for about half of the food-related greenhouse gas emissions in western countries.”

The plate model embodies the “optimal composition of a meal” and complements two new food pyramids – one for omnivores and one for vegetarians (a first) – to be published in the autumn.

Half of people’s diets should be made up of a wide variety of fruits and vegetables that provide essential vitamins, minerals and fibre. These are low in emissions, as long as they’re locally produced and in season.

A quarter should comprise whole grains like bread, pasta, rice and potatoes, which are rich in complex carbohydrates, fibre and other vital nutrients. And the final quarter should consist of protein side dishes, which should predominantly come from plant-based sources like legumes, nuts, and seeds. The recommendation to prioritise plant proteins is thanks to their health and environmental benefits.

Meat products are recommended in moderation as they can be high in cholesterol, saturated fat and salt, as well as resource-intensive. This is why animal fats like butter are also advised to be used only in small quantities, with the guidelines encouraging Austrians to use plant-based fats like rapeseed oil, olive oil, walnut oil, and others.

Austria’s national guidelines follow Eat-Lancet’s Planetary Health Diet

For omnivores, Austria’s new national food guidelines suggest five servings of fruits and vegetables, four servings of grains and potatoes, three servings of milk and dairy products, and two servings of fats and oils per day. This is complemented by three servings each of pulses and their products and eggs per week, and just one weekly portion each of meat and fish (plus an optional extra serving).

At 226g and 200g respectively, the meat and fish recommendations are in line with those of the Eat-Lancet Planetary Health Diet, which suggests eating no more than 301g of meat and 196g of fish each week.

Vegetarians, meanwhile, are advised to eat five servings each of produce and grains, and the same amount of dairy and oils as omnivores daily. Additionally, they should eat an extra serving each of plant proteins and eggs, amounting to four per week.

The cookbook – which offers suggestions to veganise each dish with plant proteins and meat and dairy analogues – also suggests ways to design healthy and climate-friendly meals. People should choose seasonal and local ingredients, prioritise plant-based foods, avoid heavily processed foods, and use herbs and spices to enhance flavours naturally without adding salt. They should also focus on animal welfare and consider organic food.

“By consciously choosing regional products and reducing the consumption of animal products, everyone can make a valuable contribution to combating climate change. Of course, taste should not be neglected. Healthy, climate-friendly, and delicious nutrition is therefore not a contradiction,” said Rauch.

Austria’s new guidelines mirror Germany’s latest recommendations, which suggest that at least 75% of people’s diets should be plant-based. The German Nutrition Society doubled down on this by changing its official position on veganism and calling it a ‘health-promoting’ diet. Similarly, the Nordic countries, Taiwan and Canada have also realigned their nutritional guidelines to spotlight plant-based foods, and France is being called upon to do the same.

The post Austria Promotes Plant Proteins & Asks People to Cut Back on Meat & Dairy in New Dietary Guidelines appeared first on Green Queen.

This post was originally published on Green Queen.