| Literature DB >> 31262312 |
Min Gon Chung1,2, Jianguo Liu3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs)-chronic human health problems such as cardiovascular diseases linked to poor diets-are significant challenges for sustainable development and human health. The international livestock trade increases accessibility to cheap animal products that may expand diet-related NCDs worldwide. However, it is not well understood how the complex interconnections among livestock production, trade, and consumption affect NCD risks around the world.Entities:
Keywords: Livestock consumption; Livestock trade; Meat consumption; Non-communicable diseases; Telecoupling
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31262312 PMCID: PMC6604153 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-019-0481-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Global Health ISSN: 1744-8603 Impact factor: 4.185
Fig. 1Flows of livestock imports in the four focal countries from 1992 to 2011. a Brazil, b China, c the UK, and d the USA: Red color indicates livestock importing countries (receiving systems), and green indicates livestock exporting countries (sending systems). Gray indicates spillover systems that have not exported livestock products to receiving systems but are affected by the trade of livestock products between sending and receiving systems. The size of the green circles shows the relative calories of livestock exported. The map was generated by the Telecoupling-GeoApp [70]. Data source: The FAOSTAT [50]
Path analysis of the relationships between livestock consumption and diet-related NCD risks through livestock production and trade from 1992 to 2011
| Path analysis | Unstandardized coefficient (S.E.) |
|---|---|
| Dependent variable: Livestock production (kcal) | |
| Protein supply of animal origin (g/capita/day) | 1.482** (0.184) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | −0.068* (0.031) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | −0.006 (0.103) |
| Population (persons) | 1.190* (0.048) |
| Dependent variable: Livestock export (kcal) | |
| Protein supply of animal origin (g/capita/day) | 4.119** (1.131) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | −0.060 (0.190) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 1.208 (0.633) |
| Population (persons) | 1.429** (0.292) |
| Dependent variable: Livestock import (kcal) | |
| Protein supply of animal origin (g/capita/day) | 0.897* (0.292) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | −0.051 (0.049) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 0.761** (0.163) |
| Population (persons) | 0.633** (0.075) |
| Dependent variable: Livestock consumption (kcal/capita/day) | |
| Livestock Production (kcal) | 0.370** (0.035) |
| Livestock Export (kcal) | 0.005 (0.006) |
| Livestock Import (kcal) | 0.049* (0.024) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | 0.053** (0.015) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 0.222** (0.043) |
| Population (persons) | −0.539** (0.042) |
| Dependent variable: Disability-adjusted life years from high (years) | |
| Livestock consumption (kcal/capita/day) | 1.557** (0.164) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | 0.023 (0.043) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 0.518** (0.115) |
| Population (persons) | 1.085** (0.065) |
| Dependent variable: Number of deaths from diets high in meat (persons) | |
| Livestock consumption (kcal/capita/day) | 1.616** (0.171) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | −0.011 (0.044) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 0.404* (0.120) |
| Population (persons) | 0.978** (0.068) |
| Dependent variable: Age-standardized death rate from diets high in meat (per 100,000 people) | |
| Livestock consumption (kcal/capita/day) | 0.589** (0.096) |
| Pasture and meadows (km2) | 0.016 (0.025) |
| GDP-PPP per capita (2011 $ const.) | 0.184* (0.067) |
| Population (persons) | 0.080* (0.038) |
|
| 149.851 |
| df | 14 |
| CFI | 0.941 |
| SRMR | 0.026 |
Values in parentheses are standard errors
All variables are log transformation variables, except the index of NCD risk factors
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.001
Fig. 2Livestock consumption by subcategories from 1961 to 2011: a Brazil increased meat consumption after the mid-1980s. b Meat consumption in China led to increases in total livestock consumption. c Animal fat consumption in the UK slightly decreased, but meat consumption stabilized. d The proportion of livestock consumption in the USA was stable. Data source: The FAOSTAT [50]
Per capita livestock consumption, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), number of NCD deaths, and NCD mortality due to diets high in meat in our four focal countries
| Brazil | China | UK | USA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Livestock consumption (kcal/capita/day) | ||||
| 1995 | 353 | 328 | 599 | 518 |
| 2010 | 484 | 503 | 568 | 534 |
| Change rate (%) | 37.1 | 53.4 | 4.2 | |
| 1995–2010 | 419 | 413 | 600 | 550 |
| DALYs (years) | ||||
| 1995 | 45,325 | 92,811 | 293,625 | 1,665,482 |
| 2010 | 128,673 | 373,648 | 190,965 | 1,650,528 |
| Change rate (%) | 183.9 | 302.6 | ||
| 1995–2010 | 88,365 | 235,207 | 234,547 | 1,773,067 |
| DALY rate (years per 100,000 people) | ||||
| 1995 | 27.71 | 7.60 | 506.48 | 625.13 |
| 2010 | 64.59 | 27.97 | 303.86 | 533.07 |
| Change rate (%) | 133.1 | 268.1 | ||
| 1995–2010 | 47.39 | 18.03 | 391.61 | 611.93 |
| Number of deaths (persons) | ||||
| 1995 | 1212 | 1997 | 14,804 | 74,133 |
| 2010 | 3579 | 8200 | 9113 | 62,177 |
| Change rate (%) | 195.3 | 310.7 | ||
| 1995–2010 | 2402 | 5060 | 11,593 | 72,974 |
| Age-standardized death rate (deaths per 100,000 people) | ||||
| 1995 | 0.74 | 0.16 | 14.50 | 20.08 |
| 2010 | 1.29 | 0.39 | 19.37 | 25.26 |
| Change rate (%) | 142.4 | 275.5 | ||
| 1995–2010 | 1.29 | 0.39 | 19.37 | 25.26 |
Fig. 3Meat consumption of bovine, pork, and poultry from 1961 to 2011: a Brazil exponentially increased its poultry consumption. b Increased meat consumption in China came from pork. c The UK stabilized its total meat consumption but consumed more poultry. d Although the USA consumed less bovine and pork meats, poultry consumption in the USA increased over the past five decades. Data source: The FAOSTAT [50]
Agents, household food expenditures, and government expenditures on health in our four focal countries (data sources: The FAOSTAT [50], WHO [68], The World Bank [51], and IMAP [69])
| Brazil | China | UK | USA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Farmers, 1000 persons (2011) | 10,495 | 504,523 | 463 | 2410 |
| Consumers, 1000 persons (2011) | 196,935 | 1,344,130 | 63,259 | 311,583 |
| Livestock consumption, kcal/capita/day (2011) | 501 | 504 | 568 | 534 |
| Protein supply of animal origin, g/capital/day (2011) | 50 | 37 | 58 | 69 |
| Food and beverage companies, numbers (2010)a | 31 | 153 | 48 | 303 |
| Household food expenditure, % (2008) | 24.1% | 33.0% | 8.5% | 5.9% |
| Household livestock products expenditure, % (2008) | 12.7% | 13.4% | 3.7% | 2.4% |
| Government expenditure on health, % (2012) | 7.6% | 12.5% | 16.1% | 19.9% |
a According to IMAP [69], food and beverage companies were classified into the farming, processing, and distribution sectors; companies’ sectors were identified according to Bloomberg’s classification: (https://www.bloomberg.com/research//common/symbollookup/symbollookup.asp)
Fig. 4Net crop and livestock supply from domestic production and trade in Brazil, China, the UK, and the USA: a Crops for livestock feed. The USA and China used more crop calories for animal feed than Brazil and the UK. China rapidly increased livestock feed after 2007. b Net livestock supply. Brazil and China have exponentially increased livestock supply since 1961. Brazil exceeded livestock supply in the UK after 1993, and China exceeded livestock supply in the USA after 1972. Data Source: The FAOSTAT [50]