According to the study, different processing methods significantly alter the biochemical composition of plant-based and alternative proteins, something that is not taken into account by the four-group NOVA system that categorizes foods by the extent of their processing.

Researchers from the Food Sciences unit at Finland’s University of Turku carried out the study, which was published in the journal Nature Food. The project focused on commercially available plant-based products made with “various technologies” and ingredients.

The authors found “clear differences” between soy-based foods, in particular, and suggested that current classification systems should “be improved” to better reflect nutrient density.

For example, tempeh is an extremely nutritious, fermented soy-based protein that the authors found was rich in potentially beneficial phytochemical compounds like isoflavonoids. Products made from soy isolates or concentrates, meanwhile, contain significantly fewer isoflavonoids. 

Phytochemicals can indicate how much the original composition of the ingredients has been preserved during processing, while epidemiological studies “consistently” find that phytochemical-rich food groups promote health, while those without do not. Despite this, both varieties of plant protein may be categorized simply as processed or ultra-processed.

Read more: Plant-Based Meat Not Associated With Adverse Health Outcomes, Government Report Finds

Nutrient-density and absorption should determine nutritional value, says study author

Ville Koistinen, one of the new study’s authors, told Phys.org that “processing food is common.” Cooking food at home, baking, or freezing can all be considered forms of processing.

“It cannot be assumed that all processing makes a product unhealthy,” added Koistinen. Ultimately it is only the nutritional components of the edible product that matter, and how they are absorbed by our bodies. These determine the nutritional value and healthiness of food products.”

Many experts have cautioned against villainizing entire food groups over a “processed” label – including in this analysis from 2024 – while various recent studies indicate that swapping animal products for processed plant-based foods can lead to positive health outcomes. Diets rich in whole, plant-based foods, in particular, are linked with various health benefits.

Read more: 5 Benefits To Food Processing

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

Monbiot is a journalist, author, and environmental activist, and writes a regular column for the Guardian. In an op-ed titled “New reports tell us cattle and sheep farming can be sustainable – don’t believe them, it’s all bull,” he debunks two recent pro-meat “studies.” Both have links to the industry and were published separately within a week of one another.

The first study focuses on so-called “regenerative grazing.” It was commissioned by Oxfordshire’s FAI Farms and funded by McDonald’s, and claims that the farm is “beyond net-zero.” However, Monbiot notes that the work is “without a single usable data point,” due to miscalculated carbon sequestration, inconsistent samples, and other “unquantifiable” variables not taken into account by the report or mentioned in its summary.

A second study, documenting what it calls “regenerative mixed farming,” was published by the Sustainable Food Trust (SFT). It suggests that cows and sheep be grazed on temporary meadows on which rotating crops are grown for two years out of every 10. Instead of pork and poultry – the two most widely consumed meats – it says that people should eat beef, lamb, and dairy.

According to Monbiot, an industry-wide rollout of SFT’s proposed “regenerative” methods would require either extensive food importation or a prescriptive national diet, along with permanently higher food prices and an immediate 50 percent reduction in food waste. Patrick Holden, the founder of SFT and farming advisor to King Charles, is notably a dairy farmer.

Read more: Factory Farms Cost UK Taxpayers Over 1.2 Billion Pounds Per Year, Says New Report

New reports amount to ‘industry lobbying’

Monbiot’s analysis comes shortly after DeSmog confirmed that a meat industry-backed PR firm was behind the extensive backlash received by 2019’s landmark EAT-Lancet Report.

In March, a report by The Animal Law Foundation found that British consumers are “systematically misled” about meat, dairy, eggs, and animal products in the food system. Changing Markets Foundation reported that 22 big meat and dairy companies are using tobacco industry-style “delay, distract, and derail” tactics to mislead shoppers.

Monbiot noted that beef and lamb are the most resource-intensive and “climate-damaging” foods of all, despite what the two new reports suggest. Farming cows and sheep causes pollution and prevents the return of carbon-storing, environmentally valuable ecosystems. 

“If such claims arose from any other sector, we would recognise them for what they are: industry lobbying,” wrote Monbiot. “But because their bucolic imagery chimes with deep cultural themes, enthusiasm for such non-solutions extends all the way from McDonald’s to King Charles. The phenomenally complex challenge of feeding the world without devouring the planet will not be met through wishful thinking and romantic simplicities.”

Read more: ‘It’s Pseudoscience’: George Monbiot Blasts Regenerative Grazing In Heated Debate

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

The team was led by scientists from the University of Exeter in the UK, who filmed “the repeated ingestion and sharing” of naturally fermented breadfruit by various combinations of chimpanzees at the Cantanhez National Park in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa.

The researchers employed motion-activated cameras to capture footage of chimpanzees sharing alcoholic fruit on 10 different occasions. Their work was published in Current Biology last month and builds on previous studies that document alcohol drinking amongst chimps.

Chimpanzees do not always share food with one another. One previous study suggested that apes have the same reciprocal willingness to share as young children, meaning they do it primarily with those who have shared food with them first.

The new footage implies that the sharing of fermented fruit, in particular, may be a bonding activity comparable to human alcohol consumption. The accompanying study notes that the sharing of alcoholic fruits “may have played a long-standing role in hominoid societies.”

Read more: Spanish Government Finally Opens Period Of Consultation For ‘Great Ape Law’

Use of alcohol ‘rooted in our deep evolutionary history’

The team’s work noted that late ripe fruits – with significantly higher alcohol content – were prioritized by chimps in 50 percent of the filmed interactions. In two out of the 10 interactions, the fruits that were not selected by chimpanzees were “clearly” less fermented. The most alcoholic fruits were only around 0.61 percent ABV, which is relatively low, but researchers said this could be the “tip of the iceberg” as the bulk of chimps’ diet is made up of fruit.

“Social eating and alcohol consumption comprise two key components of feasting behaviour in humans,” wrote the Exeter-based researchers. “But do the origins of feasting behaviour derive from a shared common ancestor? Our data provide the first evidence for ethanolic food sharing and feeding by wild nonhuman great apes, and supports the idea that the use of alcohol by humans is not ‘recent’ but rather rooted in our deep evolutionary history.”

In October of last year, an analysis of existing research on non-human alcohol consumption summarized how widespread the phenomenon is amongst wildlife, including chimpanzees and other apes. In addition to ethanol, naturally fermented fruits are rich in calories and vitamins, and their consumption is both “ecologically relevant” and potentially ancient.

Read more: Conservation Funding Prioritizes Large Mammals Over More Threatened Species, Study Finds

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

This indicates that eating animal products has no inherent benefit for people looking to maximize their muscle gains. The randomized control trial also found that variable protein distribution, quality, and digestibility had no impact on participants’ muscle growth.

The study focused on 40 healthy, physically active adults aged between 20 and 40. After an initial “habituation” diet to standardize their nutrient levels, the participants were assigned either omnivorous or vegan diets. All participants engaged in strength training and tracked their overall activity levels. They also drank deuterium-infused water that allowed the research team to trace consumed amino acids as they were incorporated into muscle fibers.

Participants were then split once again, with some eating a regular amount of protein at each meal and some eating a variable amount. For the omnivores, approximately 70 percent of their protein came from animal-based sources, and the vegans consumed a well-balanced amino acid profile throughout. Leg tissue biopsies were taken at the start and the end.

“The longstanding belief or the current dogma was that animal-based protein sources were better, particularly for the muscle-building response,” explained study lead Nicholas Burd, professor of health and kinesiology at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

“It was thought that it was better to get a steady-state delivery of nutrients throughout the day,” continued Burd. “I also thought that if you’re getting a lower quality protein – in terms of its digestibility and amino acid content – that perhaps distribution would make a difference. And surprisingly, we showed it doesn’t matter.”

Read more: 5 Elite Vegan Athletes Weigh In On The Best Foods For Protein

Choice of protein ‘really doesn’t make a difference’

The scientific journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise published the new study in April. It followed a previous study by the same team that found protein intakes higher than 1.1g of protein per 1kg of bodyweight per day make no difference to muscle gains while training.

In November, a beef industry-funded study that set out to prove the inferiority of plant proteins instead found that vegan options have the same muscle and health benefits as meat, including when participants relied on so-called “incomplete” protein from bread.

Recent research found that nearly 90 percent of Americans incorrectly believed that meat, dairy, eggs, and other animal products were an important part of getting enough protein. The New York Times previously reported that Americans get around twice the daily recommended amount, something that Harvard Health notes can cause health issues like kidney stones.

Burd said that the best type of food for muscle building is “the kind you put in your mouth” right after doing exercise. “As long as you’re getting sufficient high-quality protein from your food, then it really doesn’t make a difference,” he added.

Read more: Plant-Based Diets Represent ‘Significant Opportunity’ To Address Global Challenges, Says Study

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

According to the study, regularly eating chia seeds can lower cholesterol, blood pressure, and triglycerides, all of which are considered risk factors for developing heart disease.

“The impact of chia seeds on diabetes, blood pressure, lipid profile, and obesity indicators” was published in Science Direct towards the end of 2024. The researchers conducted a systematic review of 14 previous clinical trials with a total of 835 participants and found that chia seeds had a positive effect on health markers, particularly in high doses and long-term.

“These results suggest that chia supplementation may offer beneficial effects on dyslipidemia, hypertension, and body weight, potentially mitigating the risk of cardiovascular disease,” wrote lead author Jalal Moludi in the study. “Overall, the addition of chia products to one’s diet results in a notable decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and triglycerides (TG).”

Read more: The 5 Most Nutritious Seeds To Add To Your Diet

Plant foods and disease risk

Chia, or Salvia hispanica, is well known for its more general health benefits. The tiny, dark seeds are deceptively nutritious, with a 28g serving containing 4.7g of protein, 11.9g of carbs, and 9.8g of fiber, along with calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, zinc, B1, and B3. Chia is also a good source of omega-3 fatty acids, which support heart and brain health.

A separate study from 2023 also found that chia seeds have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, linked to reduced cancer, diabetes, and heart disease risk. Some research highlights the broader potential of plant-based foods like nuts and seeds to reduce inflammation and disease risk overall, in stark contrast to meat and animal foods.

The new study noted that they detected “no significant impact” on diastolic blood pressure (DBP), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), body size, and blood sugar. Additional research with larger sample sizes could help further explore chia’s potential health benefits.

Read more: This ‘Blueberries And Cream’ Chia Pudding Is The Perfect Vegan Breakfast

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

The University of Tokyo’s Professor Shoji Takeuchi and his team have developed technology that imitates a circulatory system and evenly distributes nutrients throughout a piece of meat. The researchers successfully grew 1 by 2 cm long, nugget-style chicken pieces.

Scientists have been working on the scalable production of cultivated meat – also known as as cultured or “lab-grown” meat – for a little over a decade. However, nutrient distribution remains a significant hurdle for “large-scale” biofabrication and growing whole cuts of meat.

“The biofabrication of cultured whole-cut meats is challenging, because it requires the formation of densely packed, highly aligned muscle fibers across a length scale larger than a few centimeters,” explained Takeuchi, writing in Trends in Biotechnology earlier this month.

To distribute nutrients evenly, the team created a bioreactor that grows meat in a gel evenly permeated by hollow fibers. This resulted in “densely packed, highly aligned muscle fibers” like those found in traditional meat, and gave the protein an “improved texture and flavor.”

These fibers currently require removal, but future projects could use cellulose versions instead, making every part edible. The addition of artificial blood could further streamline production by carrying more oxygen and allowing for even larger pieces of meat.

Read more: V-Label International Launches New ‘C-Label’ For Cultivated Meat

The growth of the cultivated meat sector

According to the Good Food Institute (GFI), there are currently nearly 200 companies working on cultivated meat or related technologies with over USD $3.1 billion in backing. However, despite multiple breakthrough announcements, scalability remains complicated.

Speaking to the Guardian, professor Derek Stewart of the James Hutton Institute’s Advanced Plant Growth Centre (APGC) described the new research as an “elegant” and “transformative” step towards the development of truly scalable cultivated meat in the future.

Takeuchi’s team noted that their breakthrough methods could also be applied outside of the food sector. Their new artificial circulatory system, for example, could potentially enable the large-scale growth of replacement organs, benefiting “regenerative and transplant medicine.”

Read more: Cultivated Pet Food Made From Mouse Cells Gets EU Approval

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

The EAT-Lancet report was a first-of-its-kind scientific review of what constitutes a healthy and sustainable diet. It included recommendations for speeding up food system change and described “The Planetary Health Diet,” which emphasizes nutritious, sustainable plant foods.

Some of the world’s most prominent food and nutrition experts carried out the research before publishing it in a peer-reviewed, evidence-based scientific report. However, it was met with notable backlash, much of which featured misinformation, conspiracy theories, and personal attacks.

According to a leaked document seen by investigative journalism website DeSmog, PR firm Red Flag played a significant role in fueling backlash against the report. According to DeSmog, the document indicates that Red Flag briefed journalists, think tanks, and influencers to frame the EAT-Lancet report as “radical,” “out of touch,” and “hypocritical.”

Read more: Animal Ag, Not Fossil Fuels, Is The Leading Cause Of Climate Change, Says New Study

‘Red Flag turned EAT-Lancet into a culture war issue’

Red Flag reportedly conducted its campaign against EAT-Lancet on behalf of the Animal Agriculture Alliance (AAA), which protects the industry against “emerging threats.” The AAA also features board members representing Cargill and Smithfield Foods, two of the world’s largest meat companies. The PR firm’s client list also includes companies from the tobacco and chemicals industries, along with Google, and DeSmog reported that Red Flag advises the Meat Institute.

“Red Flag turned EAT-Lancet into a culture war issue,” said Jennifer Jacquet, professor of environmental science and policy at the University of Miami and lobbying expert, per DeSmog. “Instead of having nuanced conversations about the data, Red Flag takes us back to mud slinging. […] This document is a portrait of what we’re up against – as people who care about the truth, about climate change, and about the future.”

Since the publication of the EAT-Lancet report in 2019, a growing body of research has reaffirmed its core points: that the current meat-focused food system is both unsustainable and unhealthy, and that emphasizing nutritious plant-based foods in place of animal proteins would have far-reaching benefits to human health, planetary health, and beyond.

An updated report titled EAT-Lancet 2.0 is coming later this year.

Plant Based News has reached out to both Red Flag and the Animal Agriculture Alliance for comment.

Read more: Over 130 Organizations Call For ‘EU Action Plan’ On Plant-Based Foods

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

Researchers from the University of Ottawa have presented tragacanth, a natural gum made from the dried sap of certain legumes, as a natural and animal-free alternative to gelatin made from farmed animals. 

In a research paper published in Physics of Fluids earlier this month, they highlighted how gelatin is “one of the most utilized biopolymers” because of its significant versatility. It can be found in food, drink, medicines, cosmetics, packaging, and even in photographic film.

This versatility is difficult to emulate, but finding an alternative has become a “significant research area” because of growing “environmental and health concerns” about animal use.

The team investigated tragacanth’s properties by blending different concentrations of the gum with gelatin and monitoring the mixture’s survivability in salinated water. They noted that because gum tragacanth is water-swellable and water-soluble, it could be a “promising” replacement. However, incorporating tragacanth led to a more porous film overall.

“Partial replacement of gelatin will reduce animal-based product use,” lead author Ezgi Pulatsu told Phys.org. “Our efforts in the full replacement of gelatin are ongoing.”

Read more: What Is Gelatin, And Why Isn’t It Suitable For Vegans?

The impact of gelatin

Gelatin is a flavorless, natural polymer derived from collagen. It is found in animal body parts and is extracted by boiling the pieces with water. Most is derived from the skins, bones, and ligaments of cows and pigs killed by the meat industry. While gelatin is often considered a by-product, its use in everything from medicines to food makes it commercially valuable.

Gelatin is a common ingredient for certain soups, dips, and sauces, and is widely used for producing gummy and foam sweets. Despite its use in confectionery, around 67 percent of people in the UK are unaware that some sweets are made using animal-derived ingredients.

In 2024, the Danish food cooperative KMC launched two versions of a potato-based gelling agent designed for making sweets. One, Gelamyl 625, retains a soft and chewy bite, while the other, Gelamyl 805, is suitable for Haribo-style gummies and Wine Gums. KMC created these gelling agents specifically as sustainable, inclusive, and versatile replacements for gelatin.

Potato is one of the lowest-impact ingredients in the world, particularly when locally sourced. Where growing potatoes has a climate footprint of approximately 0.29kg of CO2 per kg, farming and harvesting cow gelatin has a footprint of 18.63kg of CO2 per kg.

Read more: Animal Ag, Not Fossil Fuels, Is The Leading Cause Of Climate Change, Says New Study

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

Microplastics and even smaller particles known as nanoplastics have been found in many parts of the human body, including reproductive organs. Microplastics contains thousands of chemicals, and can impact hormone production, lower sperm counts and quality, and cause damage to ovaries and erectile function.

But anthocyanins, the natural compounds found in many plants that give them their color, appear to offer some protection against these effects. Oxidative damage and inflammation are two major causes of microplastic toxicity in the body. Anthocyanins can counteract this due to their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

Read more: Plant-Rich Diets Boost Gut Health, Study Finds

The mechanism by which the plant compounds offer protection is their interaction with steroid receptors that bind with important reproductive hormones such as estrogen and androgen. According to the research, anthocyanins either stop microplastics from interacting with steroid receptors, or directly interact with the receptors themselves. The compounds modulate the receptors, potentially helping to restore hormonal balance and and protect reproductive organs. Anthocyanins are a “promising candidate” in the ongoing search for natural compounds that can counteract the harmful effects of microplastics, the study concludes.

Which foods contain anthocyanins?

Fruits and vegetables that are red, purple, or blue are particularly rich in anthocyanins. Berries including mulberries, blackberries, and cherries are good sources of these compounds. Black beans, red onion, red cabbage, and aubergines are also rich in anthocyanins.

Anthocyanins are a subset of the group of antioxidants called flavonoids. As well as giving fruits and vegetables their color, they are responsible for the color of many flowers.

Several studies have found that anthocyanins can help to prevent diseases linked to inflammation and oxidative stress. These include cardiovascular disease and neurodegenerative conditions. Anthocyanins also support gut health, improving the diversity of gut bacteria and boosting the number of good bacteria.

Read more: Eating A Higher Ratio Of Plant Protein Supports Heart Health, Finds Study

This article was written by Claire Hamlett on the PBN Website.

The study drew on data from 14,566 conservation projects with a combined fund of USD $1.963 billion. An analysis showed that 82.9 percent of the funding and 84 percent of the projects were focused on vertebrates. This is 10 to 40 percent more than reported in previous studies. Among vertebrates, birds and mammals receive 85 percent of funding, while amphibians receive just 2.8 percent.

Large mammals such as elephants and rhinos are even more overrepresented in conservation projects. Though they account for only a third of threatened mammals, 86 percent of funding is dedicated to them. Meanwhile, funding for other mammals that are classed as endangered such as rodents, bats, and hedgehogs is limited. Overall, funding supports around six percent of species classified as threatened, and 29 percent of the funding was used for species of “least concern.”

Read more: ‘Old And Wise’ Animals Essential For Species Survival, Study Finds

“Both governments and nongovernmental stakeholders urgently need new approaches to help tackle the biodiversity crisis,” the researchers write. This includes “realigning funding priorities to ensure representative funding across taxa toward vulnerable and currently neglected species.”

Small species and plants neglected

Plants and invertebrates receive hardly any conservation attention, the research found. Each accounts for only 6.6 percent ($129 million) of funding and 7.8 percent and 5.7 percent of conservation projects, respectively. This is despite 45 percent of flowering plant species being threatened with extinction, and invertebrates accounting for around 97 percent of all animals on the planet. Fungi and algae are even more neglected, accounting for less than 0.2 percent of funding each.

Part of the problem is that a relatively small number of these species have assessed for their conservation status. While 80 percent of vertebrates have been assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), only 18 percent of plants, 1.8 percent of invertebrates, and 0.4 percent of fungi have been. Many of these species remain undocumented by science.

A further problem, according to the new research, is that the majority of conservation projects target single species instead of multiple species. This means habitats and ecosystems that support many “less conspicuous species” don’t get as much support.

“Future allocation of funding needs to address these biases by distributing resources to a wider range of vulnerable species,” the researchers write.

Read more: Wild Fish Can Tell Humans Apart By Their Clothing, Study Finds

This article was written by Claire Hamlett on the PBN Website.

Burning fossil fuels for energy is widely accepted as the leading cause of global warming. But in a peer-reviewed paper published in Environmental Research Letters, Gerard Wedderburn-Bisshop argues that animal agriculture is actually the primary driver of climate change, responsible for 53 percent of global average temperature rise between 1750 and 2020. That equates to 0.64ºC of warming. In contrast, he claims that fossil fuels are responsible for 19 percent of warming, equating to 0.21°C.

Read more: Scientists Observe Factory Farm Pollution From Space

Wedderburn-Bisshop, a former Australian government environmental scientist who is now Executive Director of World Preservation Foundation, contends that the way emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) are calculated, devised in the 1990s, are out of date. Applying advances in understanding of emissions gives a more accurate picture of global warming’s causes, he argues. This method reveals land use change, driven mainly by animal agriculture, to be a far bigger contributor of emissions than previously thought.

Consistent accounting

There are three advances in climate science that Wedderburn-Bisshop applies to arrive at his conclusion. First is the use of consistent carbon accounting. His paper explains that emissions accounting rules of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have meant that full emissions are counted for fossil fuels and all other sources, with the exception of deforestation.

When vegetation and trees regrow, they draw down carbon. This has led to emissions from human activities causing deforestation being counted partially as net emissions rather than gross emissions. Meanwhile, gross emissions are counted for burning fossil fuels. But all emissions, no matter the source, get drawn down by growing vegetation, which means they should be counted the same way, and that deforestation-causing sectors shouldn’t be credited with the free work nature is doing to absorb their emissions, says the study.

Consistent use of gross emissions accounting across sectors reveals animal agriculture, the biggest cause of land use change and deforestation, to be responsible for 19 percent more carbon than fossil fuels since 1750, according to the paper. Another paper published by Wedderburn-Bisshop in October 2024 covers this topic in more depth.

Effective Radiative Forcing and inclusive accounting

How to account for the warming potentials of different greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide and methane, has been the subject of much debate. Global Warming Potential over a 100 year period (GWP100) has been the IPCC standard metric, but recently there have been efforts, pushed particularly by high-methane emitting sectors like animal agriculture, to use others such as GWP*, which accounts for the shorter lifespan of methane compared to CO2.

Instead of GWP, Wedderburn-Bisshop argues that Effective Radiative Forcing (ERF) should be used. “ERFs are the best science available on warming caused by each gas. They are calculated in very complex atmospheric and spatial models, and are fitted to observations, so they are the most accurate metric we have,” he said. Using ERF to measure the climate impact of different gases reveals that methane’s impact, understood cumulatively, has been vastly underestimated.

Read more: UK Facing Broccoli Shortage Due To Changing Climate

The third advance that changes understanding of the main sources of climate change is for all emissions, both warming and cooling, to be counted. While animal agriculture emits mostly warming gases, fossil fuels emit gases that have both warming and cooling effects. The cooling gases have masked the warming impact of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. This inclusive accounting reveals that while fossil fuel warming accounts for 0.79°C, there is 0.59°C cooling from co-emissions. By contrast, agriculture as a whole has caused 0.86°C warming but only 0.13°C cooling.

Policy implications

“Ignoring cooling from fossil fuel burning strongly distorts the true picture of what human activities have caused global warming,” Wedderburn-Bisshop told Plant Based News. “If we account for cooling, we have a far greater understanding of what is actually happening, so we are in a far better position to develop a more effective policy response.”

Applying inclusive and consistent accounting along with ERF would mean a shift in climate policy. “Normalizing and adopting gross deforestation emissions accounting would support policies aimed at reducing deforestation and preserving forests,” writes Wedderburn-Bisshop. “Knowing that clearing and re-clearing re-release an increasing proportion of fossil carbon informs policy that destruction of forest of any age could be seen in the same way as burning coal.”

However, the break down of cooling aerosols will result in future warming from fossil fuels. For this reason, Wedderburn-Bisshop stresses the necessity of an urgent shift away from fossil fuels.

Choices to be made

Wedderburn-Bisshop’s approach disputes the long-held view that fossil fuels are the leading cause of climate change. According to the IPCC, anthropogenic carbon dioxide has contributed the most to global warming, followed by methane. The official figure from the United Nations states that animal agriculture is responsible for 14.5 percent of emissions, which is a figure still supported by many climate scientists. Another study published in 2021 put the “minimum figure” at 16.5 percent.

However, Wedderburn-Bisshop’s paper is part of an ongoing debate about how best to measure emissions and their warming impacts. The IPCC has discussed the choices that need to be made when it comes to which emissions metrics to use. In 2018, it wrote: “Some of the choices involved in metrics are scientific (e.g., type of model, and how processes are included or parameterized in the models). Choices of time frames and climate impact are policy-related and cannot be based on science alone, but can be used to analyse different approaches and policy choices.”

Read more: Over 130 Organizations Call For ‘EU Action Plan’ On Plant-Based Foods

This article was written by Claire Hamlett on the PBN Website.

Researchers observed fish using visual cues like diving gear color to tell humans apart. The saddled sea bream and black sea bream used in the study possess “acute color vision,” which they successfully used to distinguish between divers with different colored clothing.

This phenomenon was observed at both a population level and within identifiable individuals. However, when divers wore matching gear, correct identification was “greatly diminished.”

Maëlan Tomasek of Germany’s Max Planck Institute of Animal Behaviour led the study, alongside Katinka Soller and Alex Jordan. The study – titled “Wild fish use visual cues to recognize individual divers” – was published in the journal Biology Letters earlier this month.

The new study noted that evidence from captive conditions suggests many aquatic species – such as octopuses and archerfish – can recognize different humans. In this case, however, researchers studied the bream within their natural habitat, the Mediterranean Sea.

Read more: Crabs And Other Crustaceans Do Feel Pain, Scientists Say

‘Maybe it’s time we that we can care about them, too’

Speaking to the Guardian, Tomasek suggested that his team’s research could prompt a reconsideration of how humans treat fish and other aquatic animals.

“It’s very human to not want to care about them, but the fact that they can care about us, maybe it’s time that we can care about them, too,” said Tomasek.

Separate research from 2023 found that certain fish can recognize themselves in pictures and reflective surfaces, which the authors suggested could indicate self-awareness. Another study, also from 2023, indicated that individuals from the tiny, tropical bluestreak cleaner wrasse species may check their size in a reflection before attacking other fish.

In 2024, other scientists from the Max Planck Institute captured footage of octopuses and fish hunting cooperatively. Speaking to NBC at the time, the study’s co-author Eduardo Sampaio noted that humans are “very similar to these animals,” and “closer than we think.”

Read more: Aquaculture Kills More Wild Fish Than Previously Thought, Study Finds

This article was written by Liam Pritchett on the PBN Website.

The study, published in the Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, analyzed 36 NHS UK hospitals and looked at sustainability plans alongside the menus on offer across the hospitals. Using this analysis, a scoring system was created assess the quantity and availability of plant-based foods versus meat-based meals. 

Read more: Denmark Agrees Deal On Agriculture Emissions Tax

Isabelle Sadler, lead author of the study, commented: “Despite the NHS’s commitment to becoming a net-zero healthcare service by 2045, our analysis reveals that hospital menus currently show little alignment with sustainable practices. With the NHS serving 140 million patient meals annually, there’s significant untapped potential to reduce environmental impact through menu changes.”

Some of the most significant findings of the study included all of the analyzed hospital menus serving processed meat, despite its group 1 carcinogen status. It found that less than 50 percent of NHS Trusts had any plans to increase plant-based portions in line with sustainability goals, and that meat from particularly damaging ruminant animals – like beef, lamb, and goat – were prominent on menus. 

Read more: One-Third Of Brits Back Plant-Based Shift In Hospitals 

Falling short on plant-based options

The study found 42 percent of the menus had no fully plant-based main dinner options, while 50 percent offered no lunch options that were fully plant-based. The majority of hospitals were not found to be making any significant efforts to encourage patients and customers to make sustainable food choices. Hospitals outsourcing catering were found to be more climate-friendly than those keeping catering in-house.

A consumer survey conducted in 2024 asked 2,000 people in the UK if they would welcome efforts to add more sustainable vegan options to hospital menus — over a third of the survey participants responded that they would be open to the idea.

PBHP UK is moving forward with the Plants First Healthcare initiative in an effort to help healthcare menus introduce more vegan food options, with the backing of other climate and health organizations. 

Plant Based News has contacted the NHS for comment.

Read more: What Neal Barnard And Other Plant-Based Doctors Have For Dinner

This article was written by Adam Protz on the PBN Website.

For the study, German researchers surveyed 2,126 Americans online. They were offered descriptions and pictures of four burgers and asked to choose between them. These were a beef burger, a more realistically meaty plant-based burger (analogue), a plant-based burger that was similar to meat in appearance only (semi-analogue), and a falafel burger (non-analogue).

While the majority, at 75 percent, chose the beef burger, the researchers were surprised that the falafel burger beat the analogue burger as the first choice of 11.5 percent of respondents. It also had the largest share of second-choice votes at 33.7 percent. The analogue burger was first choice for the fewest people, only 6.3 percent. The results also revealed that most people would eat a meat-free burger if no meat burger were available. Just a third would refuse to eat a meat-free burger in such a scenario.

Read more: Digital ‘Nudging’ Can Motivate Online Shoppers To Buy Plant-Based Foods, Says Study

“This contradicts the widespread assumption that meat substitutes are only competitive if they are as close as possible to the original,” lead author Steffen Jahn said in a statement.

Price makes a difference

Many manufacturers of plant-based meat alternatives are trying to replicate meat as closely as possible with plant ingredients. But the study suggests that similarity to meat might matter less than cost.

As a second part of the study, the researchers asked participants to make choices once prices had been attached to the burgers. Cost had notable impact on whether participants chose meat-free burgers or not. If they were more expensive than the beef burger, as they often are in reality, there was a 20 percent drop in people choosing them.

The share of people choose meat-free burgers rose to 21 percent if they cost the same as beef burgers. If they were cheaper, that share rose further. When they cost half as much as meat, 38 percent of people chose them. Preference for analogue burgers in particular rose based on lower price.

Unexpectedly, the number of male participants that chose cheaper meat-free burgers reached nearly 50 percent. This was despite men being more committed to eating meat. Even men who had never tried a meat-free burger before opted for one if it was a lot cheaper.

“Restaurants and food manufacturers might actually be able to increase their sales of vegetarian or vegan alternatives if they offered meat substitutes at lower prices than the meat options,” said Jahn. “A truly faithful imitation is not the goal here, our study suggests.” He speculated that this could be because people have come to think of meat analogues as ultra-processed.

Read more: Shoppers Feel Sorry For ‘Sad’ Lone Bananas In Supermarkets, Study Finds

This article was written by Claire Hamlett on the PBN Website.

Some birds use the fur of dogs and cats to line their nests. Researchers from the UK and Switzerland collected 103 fur-lined nests from blue and great tits at the end of breeding season. In the study, published in Science of the Total Environment, they found that every nest was contaminated with between two to 11 types of chemicals, including fipronil and imidacloprid. Fipronil is banned for agricultural use in Europe and the UK and imidacloprid is banned in Europe. But it is still legal to use both in flea treatments for companion animals. The researchers also detected 15 other types of pesticides.

Read more: Cats Are Getting Sick And Dying From Bird Flu In The US

In nests with a higher number or concentration of pesticides, the researchers found a higher number of unhatched eggs or dead chicks. More highly contaminated nests came from urban areas where there was more exposure to treated dog or cat fur.

Call for changes to veterinary drug use

The chemicals are so prevalent in the environment because of the frequency with which they are used and the huge number of animals they are applied to.

Flea and tick treatments containing insecticides are often applied topically to fur, with vets usually recommending they be used monthly. There are around 12.5 million cats and 13.5 million dogs living in the UK. Around 80 percent receive flea treatments at least once a year, according to the study. Given the numbers, “there is clear potential for substantial amounts of these chemicals to enter the environment,” the researchers write.

Research has revealed contamination of rivers in the UK with chemicals from topical flea and tick treatments. They enter waterways when treated dogs swim in river or owners wash their hands after application. Even at low concentrations, the insecticides can kill aquatic wildlife.

Scientists and campaigners have called on the UK government to change its approach to the use of the insecticides. They have urged comprehensive environmental risk assessments of the use of veterinary drugs and for vets to recommend the use of flea treatment only when animals actually have fleas.

Read more: Wildlife Populations Have Plunged 73% In 50 Years

This article was written by Claire Hamlett on the PBN Website.