Meat Consumption in Brazil: Social Inequalities and Food Security
Author Information
Author(s): Bonfim Samantha Marques Vasconcelos, Leite Marhya Júlia Silva, Camusso Isabela Gonçalves, Marchioni Dirce Maria Lobo, Carvalho Aline Martins
Primary Institution: Department of Nutrition, Faculty of Public Health, University of São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil
Hypothesis
This study aims to examine meat consumption across the five Brazilian regions through the lens of the Planetary Health Diet, considering regionalisms and social inequalities.
Conclusion
Meat consumption exceeds recommendations in all Brazilian regions, highlighting the need for public health interventions that consider regional disparities and the cultural significance of meat.
Supporting Evidence
- 98% of Brazilians consumed some meat on the reported days.
- Over 50% of consumers exceeded the maximum recommended value of 56.8 g per 2000 kcal/day for total meat.
- Consumption varied considerably across the five regions of Brazil.
- Men were more likely to consume excessive amounts of red meat compared to women.
- Individuals in the Midwest were twice as likely to exceed the upper limit for beef and lamb consumption.
Takeaway
Most people in Brazil eat meat, and many eat more than is healthy or good for the environment. We need to think about how different regions and cultures affect what people eat.
Methodology
The study used data from the 2017–2018 Household Budget Survey and employed multiple logistic regression analysis to assess meat consumption and its association with sociodemographic factors.
Potential Biases
The categorization of participants into only two racial groups may not accurately reflect the realities of household income in Brazil.
Limitations
The study's food insecurity data refer to household levels rather than individual levels, and there may be under-reporting of food consumption.
Participant Demographics
The sample consisted of individuals over 10 years of age from various regions of Brazil.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.05
Confidence Interval
95% CI
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website