YOUR SUCCESS MATTERS
Based on the search results, some key financial metrics service-based entrepreneurs should track to balance growth and profitability include: 1. Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC): This measures the average cost of acquiring a new customer, which is crucial for ensuring...
Based on the search results, some common mistakes service-based entrepreneurs make during rapid growth include: 1. Neglecting a Solid Foundation: Prioritizing growth over establishing a strong operational foundation, which can lead to instability and challenges as the...
Some common challenges when scaling a business include: 1. Overlooking the Product-Market Fit: Failing to understand the target market and sustainable demand can sabotage success when scaling[1]. 2. Working With the Wrong People: Hiring the right team members and...
by VEGNEWS EDITORS.
Limiting red meat consumption is increasingly recognized as key to a sustainable and healthy diet; yet, Americans remain among the world’s largest consumers of red meat, with a per capita consumption of more than 57 pounds annually in 2023. While meat consumption trends are shifting, new research uncovers who in the US is most likely to avoid red meat and why, revealing a complex interplay of environmental awareness, health concerns, and financial considerations.
A study conducted by researchers at Baruch College and the University of Southern California sheds light on the demographics of American adults who opt out of red meat. Drawing on data from the Understanding America Study, a nationally representative panel of more than 7,500 adults, the researchers found that only 12 percent of participants reported abstaining from red meat. These individuals were more likely to be female, 65 or older, hold a college degree, have an annual income of $60,000 or less, and identify as non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, or Asian.
Political affiliation also emerged as a factor, with Democrats and Independents being more likely to avoid red meat than Republicans. Lead author Patrycja Sleboda, assistant professor of psychology at Baruch College, noted the key motivations driving these dietary choices: “People may be more familiar with the environmental benefits of not eating red meat than with the potential health benefits.”
Environmental awareness among red meat abstainers aligns with rising concerns about climate change. Red meat production contributes significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for 15 percent of total global emissions and over 70 percent of food-related emissions, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Deforestation for cattle ranching and the water-intensive nature of meat production compound these impacts. By choosing not to consume red meat, individuals can lower their personal contribution to climate change.
Interestingly, health concerns did not significantly correlate with red meat avoidance in this study. This finding contrasts with growing evidence linking high consumption of red and processed meats to health risks, including colorectal, stomach, and pancreatic cancers. While organizations like the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association recommend limiting red meat, the disconnect between public health messaging and dietary behavior remains notable.
Budget shoppers opting for meat alternatives
A separate study from Rutgers University and published in the journal Appetite offers additional context. Surveying 1,200 adults, researchers found that nearly 70 percent of respondents had reduced their red meat intake over the past year. However, the primary driver was not environmental awareness but cost, cited by nearly one-third of respondents. Health concerns followed closely, with 64 percent indicating they had cut back on red meat due to its potential health risks.
This economic sensitivity reflects broader trends in food prices. According to the US Department of Agriculture, beef prices increased by 4.2 percent in September 2024 compared to the previous year, with poultry prices rising even higher at 6.3 percent. Price sensitivity was particularly pronounced among those earning between $25,000 and $49,999 annually, as well as among women and Black respondents. Among older adults—those aged 65 and above—red meat reduction was also more common, aligning with demographic patterns observed in the Baruch College study.
Despite widespread reductions in meat consumption, sustainability messaging appears to have limited influence on most Americans’ dietary choices. Shauna Downs, lead author of the Rutgers study, emphasized the gap between environmental knowledge and behavior.
The Rutgers study further highlighted demographic differences in prioritizing health, cost, and sustainability. Women were more likely than men to factor environmental concerns into their meat consumption decisions, while Black individuals placed greater emphasis on price, health, and sustainability compared to other groups. Although only five percent of respondents reported following a vegetarian, vegan, or plant-based diet, nearly 70 percent said they were actively reducing their red meat consumption, showing a significant shift in habits.
Taken together, these studies reveal the multifaceted drivers behind Americans’ evolving relationship with red meat. While environmental awareness influences a small but growing portion of the population, health and affordability remain the dominant motivators for most.
See Original Article at VegNews
