To determine the differences in environmental impact and nutrient content of the current Dutch diet and four healthy diets aimed at lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG emissions (as proxy for environmental impact) and nutrient content of the current Dutch diet and four diets adhering to the Dutch food based dietary guidelines (Wheel of Five), were compared in a scenario study. Scenarios included a healthy diet with or without meat, and the same diets in which only foods with relatively low GHG emissions are chosen. For the current diet, data from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2007-2010 were used. GHG emissions (in kg CO2-equivalents) were based on life cycle assessments. Results are reported for men and women aged 19-30years and 31-50years. The effect on GHG emissions of changing the current Dutch diet to a diet according to the Wheel of Five (corresponding with the current diet as close as possible), ranged from -13% for men aged 31-50years to +5% for women aged 19-30years. Replacing meat in this diet and/or consuming only foods with relatively low GHG emissions resulted in average GHG emission reductions varying from 28-46%. In the scenarios in which only foods with relatively low GHG emissions are consumed, fewer dietary reference intakes (DRIs) were met than in the other healthy diet scenarios. However, in all healthy diet scenarios the number of DRIs being met was equal to or higher than that in the current diet. Diets adhering to food based dietary guidelines did not substantially reduce GHG emissions compared to the current Dutch diet, when these diets stayed as close to the current diet as possible. Omitting meat from these healthy diets or consuming only foods with relatively low associated GHG emissions both resulted in GHG emission reductions of around a third. These findings may be used to expand food based dietary guidelines with information on how to reduce the environmental impact of healthy diets.

Objective: To evaluate the greenhouse gas emission (GHGE) of diets in Dutch girls, boys, women and men and to explore associations with diet composition.Design: Descriptive analyses for the total population as well as stratified for gender, age and dietary environmental load.Setting: The Netherlands.Subjects: Dutch children and adults aged 7–69 years (n 3818).Results: The GHGE of daily diets was on average 3·2 kg CO₂-equivalents (CO₂e) for girls, 3·6 kg CO₂e for boys, 3·7 kg CO₂e for women and 4·8 kg CO₂e for men. Meat and cheese contributed about 40 % and drinks (including milk and alcoholic drinks) 20 % to daily GHGE. Considerable differences in environmental loads of diets existed within age and gender groups. Persons with higher-GHGE diets consumed more (in quantity of foods and especially drinks) than their counterparts of a similar sex and age with low-GHGE diets. Major differences between high- and low-GHGE diets were in meat, cheese and dairy consumption as well as in soft drinks (girls, boys and women) and alcoholic drinks (men). Of those, differences in meat consumption determined the differences in GHGE most. Diets with higher GHGE were associated with higher saturated fat intake and lower fibre intakeConclusions: GHGE of daily diets in the Netherlands is between 3 and 5 kg CO₂e, with considerable differences between individuals. Meat, dairy and drinks contribute most to GHGE. The insights of the study may be used in developing (age- and gender-specific) food-based dietary guidelines that take into account both health and sustainability aspects.

Objective: Our current food consumption patterns, and in particular our meat and dairy intakes, cause high environmental pressure. The present modelling study investigates the impact of diets with less or no meat and dairy foods on nutrient intakes and assesses nutritional adequacy by comparing these diets with dietary reference intakes.Design: Environmental impact and nutrient intakes were assessed for the observed consumption pattern (reference) and two replacement scenarios. For the replacement scenarios, 30 % or 100 % of meat and dairy consumption (in grams) was replaced with plant-based alternatives and nutrient intakes, greenhouse gas emissions and land use were calculated.Setting: The Netherlands.Subjects: Dutch adults (n 2102) aged 19–69 years.Results: Replacing 30 % of meat and dairy with plant-based alternatives did not substantially alter percentages below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) for all studied nutrients. In the 100 % replacement scenario, SFA intake decreased on average by ~35 % and Na intake by ~8 %. Median Ca intakes were below the Adequate Intake. Estimated habitual fibre, Fe and vitamin D intakes were higher; however, non-haem Fe had lower bioavailability. For Zn, thiamin and vitamin B₁₂, 10–31 % and for vitamin A, 60 % of adults had intakes below the EAR.Conclusions: Diets with all meat and dairy replaced with plant-based foods lowered environmental impacts by >40 %. Estimated intakes of Zn, thiamin, vitamins A and B₁₂, and probably Ca, were below recommendations. Replacing 30 % was beneficial for SFA, Na, fibre and vitamin D intakes, neutral for other nutrients, while reducing environmental impacts by 14 %.

Food choices influence health status, but also have a great impact on the environment. The production of animal-derived foods has a high environmental burden, whereas the burden of refined carbohydrates, vegetables and fruit is low. The aim of this study was to investigate the associations of greenhouse gas emission (GHGE) and land use of usual diet with mortality risk, and to estimate the effect of a modelled meat substitution scenario on health and the environment.

Background: The Healthy Reference Diet (HRD) was created to formulate dietary guidelines that would be healthy and sustainable. We aimed to construct a diet score measuring adherence to the HRD and to explore its association with cardiovascular events and environmental impact. Methods and Results: We included 35 496 participants from the population‐based EPIC‐NL (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition‐Netherlands) study. HRD scores were calculated using data from food frequency questionnaires (0–140). Data on morbidity and mortality were retrieved through linkage with national and death registries. Data on environmental impact indicators were obtained from life cycle assessments. Associations between adherence to the HRD and cardiovascular events were estimated with Cox proportional hazard models. Linear regression analysis was conducted for the adherence to the HRD and each environmental indicator. High adherence to the HRD was associated with 14%, 12%, and 11% lower risks of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio [HR] _Q4vsQ1 , 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78–0.94]), coronary heart disease (HR _Q4vsQ1 , 0.88 [95% CI, 0.78–1.00]), and total stroke (HR _Q4vsQ1 , 0.89 [95% CI, 0.72–1.10]), respectively. High HRD adherence was associated with 2.4% (95% CI, −5.0 to 0.2) lower greenhouse gas emissions, 3.9% (95% CI, −5.2 to −2.6) less land use, 0.5% (95% CI, −2.6 to 1.6), less freshwater eutrophication, 3.3% (95% CI, −5.8 to −0.8), less marine eutrophication, 7.7% (95% CI, −10.8 to −4.6), less terrestrial acidification, and 32.1 % (95% CI, 28.5–35.7) higher blue water use. Conclusions: High adherence to the HRD was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and modestly lower levels of most environmental indicators but a higher level of blue water use.