|The authors of the EAT Lancet Commission report, Food in the Anthropocene, may not have intended their work to be a polemic, but polemic it has become.
Its notion of a “great food transition” has especially outraged regenerative farmers who
are working to raise healthy animals in sustainable systems. It has divided green groups into either conceding the broad brush strokes of its conclusions or picking apart its shocking lack of detail. The mainstream media’s acquiescence—as if the report’s findings had been delivered from on high—has also been a cause of significant frustration.
As the philosophical and financial interests of the groups behind the report have been uncovered, it has also raised the spectre of bias, corporate agendas and science for sale.
There are multiple unsettling aspects to the report, beginning with its dismissal of the dietary value of animal foods. Its ‘healthy’ reference diet excludes all but a daily forkful of red meat and only marginally more poultry and fish, one quarter of an egg and no dairy products at all.
Instead it suggests we seek protein from legumes—a legitimate, healthful and sustainable option as part of a balanced and diverse diet, but no substitute for animal foods.
Among its recommendations are alternative sources of protein such as lab-grown meat, insects and algae. It’s these proposed ‘solutions’, which mostly require factories rather than farms to produce, that hint at the dark corporate heart of the report.
Read the entire article by Pat Thomas, journalist, author and campaigner specializing in the intersection of food, health and environment, here —