This post summarizes the main findings of a new meta-analysis from the Humane and Sustainable Food Lab. We analyze the most rigorous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that aim to reduce consumption of meat and animal products (MAP). We conclude that no theoretical approach, delivery mechanism, or persuasive message should be considered a well-validated means of reducing MAP consumption. By contrast, reducing consumption of red and processed meat (RPM) appears to be an easier target. However, if RPM reductions lead to more consumption of other MAP like chicken and fish, this is likely bad for animal welfare and doesn’t ameliorate zoonotic outbreak or land and water pollution. We also find that many promising approaches await rigorous evaluation.
This post updates a post from a year ago. We first summarize the current paper, and then describe how the project and its findings have evolved.
What is a rigorous RCT?
There is [...]
---
Outline:
(01:09) What is a rigorous RCT?
(02:15) The main theoretical approaches:
(04:45) Results: consistently small effects
(07:22) Where do we go from here?
(09:00) How has this project changed over time?
---
First published:
November 25th, 2024
Source:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/i5wnzz4uAgeF3ZRc5/research-report-meaningfully-reducing-consumption-of-meat
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
Images from the article:
Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.
