The Beef Divide: How a Small Minority Consumes Half of America’s Meat

In the land of burgers, steaks, and meatballs, there’s a striking divide emerging – 50% of all beef consumed in the United States finds its way to the plates of just 12% of the population, supposedly, as was recently reported by the New York Post. This revelation comes from a recent study that sheds light on the heavy consumption of beef by a small segment of Americans and the significant health implications it carries, the report added. Most of those who consume meat are men.

According to the study, the current dietary guidelines set by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recommend a daily intake of four ounces of meat, poultry, and eggs for those on a 2200-calorie diet, the Post reported. However, a substantial portion of the population exceeds this guideline.

“On average, teenage boys consume more meat, poultry and eggs than is recommended in the [Dietary Guidelines for Americans]. For adult men, the distance from the recommendations is even greater,” the study authors wrote, as was reported by the Post.

“This may be because meat, especially red meat, is associated with masculinity, strength and power in Western culture,” they added.

“Men are more likely to subscribe to the idea that human lives are more valuable than those of animals, and are more likely to associate meat with healthiness. Whatever the reasons, men are significantly less likely than women to consider reducing their meat consumption.”

The USDA’s data for 2021 paints a vivid picture – Americans collectively devoured a staggering 30 billion pounds of beef, averaging nearly 60 pounds per person annually, according to information provided in the Post report. This consumption is not evenly distributed, with a mere 12% of the population contributing to half of this colossal figure.

Dr. Diego Rose, the nutrition program director at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine and the study’s author, expressed his surprise at the study’s findings, as was reported by the Post. The focus on beef consumption stems from its environmental impact and its high saturated fat content, which poses health risks.

“We focused on beef because of its impact on the environment, and because it’s high in saturated fat, which is not good for your health,” Rose said, according to the Post report.

Studies consistently link the consumption of red and processed meats to a range of health problems, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and premature death. The Post reported that Dr. Frank Hu, the Chair of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, highlighted the consistency of evidence across various studies. “The evidence is consistent across different studies,” he said.

While nearly a third of beef consumption came from traditional cuts like steak or brisket, six of the top ten sources were processed meat products such as burgers, hot dogs, burritos, tacos, meatloaf, or meat sauce, according to the Post report.

The study, published in the journal Nutrients, analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which tracked the dietary habits of over 10,000 adults over a 24-hour period, as was indicated in the Post report. The goal of the research was to identify the segment of the population consuming disproportionate amounts of beef, helping target educational programs effectively.

Efforts to change the beef-eating habits of this small but beefy minority may not be straightforward. The Post reported that Dr. Rose acknowledged potential resistance to change among this group, but he also recognized the potential for significant gains if they can be convinced to reduce their beef consumption.

“On one hand, if it’s only 12% accounting for half the beef consumption, you could make some big gains if you get those 12% on board,” Rose said, as was reported by the Post. “On the other hand, those 12% may be most resistant to change.”

Experts believe that altering diets may not require drastic changes; small adjustments can make a difference, as was noted in the Post report. For example, when ordering a burrito, opting for chicken instead of beef can be a simple yet impactful choice. Leading the charge, Amelia Willits-Smith, the study’s lead author and a post-doctoral fellow at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, emphasized that those with relatively lower beef intake tend to have lower health risks.

Encouraging Americans to adopt a more balanced approach to meat consumption is crucial, not only for personal health but also for environmental sustainability. As discussions surrounding dietary choices continue, the hope is that more Americans will opt for healthier, more sustainable alternatives, helping to bridge the beef divide.