Beef is making a comeback – does it fit into a healthy diet?

The US government caused quite a stir earlier this year when it unveiled its new dietary guidelines. A cut of red meat now commands the highest price, sitting at the widest part of the food pyramid, meaning that beef and other animal proteins should form a substantial part of a healthy diet.

The guidelines are a sharp departure from public health reports of the past few decades, which recommended limiting red meat consumption. “It’s very confusing for consumers,” he says Sara Bleich at Harvard University, who previously worked at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) under former President Joe Biden. “You look at that picture—which has a huge piece of steak—and naturally you say, ‘Oh! I can eat all the steak I want,'” he says.

Beef’s comeback didn’t come out of nowhere—it’s been brewing for years. Social media is full of posts about carnivorous diets. Influencers hawk beef tallow for use in the kitchen and outdoors. Even Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—a leading public health official in the U.S.—bragged online about how he fried his Thanksgiving turkey in a vat of beef lard. “This is how we cook the MAHA way – beef tallow,” said va videos on social networksreferring to his policy initiative Make America Healthy Again, which encourages people to “eat real food”. But not all so-called real foods are created equal.

The scientific picture of red meat has remained largely the same over the past few decades. It remains one of the most climate-challenging foods on the menu, and study after study links its consumption to worse health outcomes such as heart disease and cancer. In March, American Heart Association has published its own dietary guidelines encouraging people to cut back on red meat and opt for plant-based protein.

So the beef revival is better viewed through a cultural lens that reflects a broader obsession with protein and a return to traditional values. A strong beef and dairy industry probably played a role as well.

The rise and fall of red meat

In past centuries, Western countries saw meat more as a secondary role on the plate than as the main character. This began to change around the 19th century as industrialization, refrigeration and rising incomes made meat more affordable and the rest of the world gradually followed suit.

In the US, annual beef consumption nearly peaked in 1976 43 kilograms (around £94) per person per year. About ten years later, the European Union reached its peak about 25 kilograms per person per year. Consumption then began to decline due to growing concerns about saturated fat and its potential link to heart disease. Around the same time, white meat products such as chicken and turkey sausage hit supermarket shelves and were marketed as a healthier, leaner alternative to red meat. Whereas one portion of ground beef contains almost 7 grams of saturated fat, a portion of ground chicken contains less than 2 grams. It got to the point that even the US National Pork Board launched a campaign in 1987 to label pork as “the second white meat”, even though it contains almost the same amount of saturated fat like beef and it’s clearly red meat.

Beef’s reputation took another blow in 2015 when the World Health Organization (WHO) convened 22 researchers from 10 countries to assess the link between red meat and cancer. After evaluating more than 800 studies, the group labeled processed meats such as bacon and ham as carcinogens, meaning they cause cancer. The analysis suggested that for every 50 grams of processed meat eaten daily – about one sausage – increases the risk of colorectal cancer by about 18 percent. “It’s about the same increase in risk as second-hand smoke,” he says Kurt Straif at Boston College, which was part of the WHO research group.

The team also classified red meat as a probable carcinogen based on studies showing a positive association between its consumption and colorectal cancer. “But overall the evidence was not that consistent [as it was for processed meat]” says Straif, noting that they couldn’t rule out another explanation for the increase in colorectal cancer among red meat eaters. Still, eating 100 grams of red meat a day — about the size of a deck of cards — was associated with a 17 percent higher risk of colorectal cancer.

Although these risks may seem small, they have a significant impact at the population level. The WHO estimates that around 34,000 cancer deaths worldwide each year can be attributed to processed meat. If the link with red meat proves to be causal, it could account for roughly 50,000 cancer deaths each year.

Also in 2015, a USDA advisory committee recommended updating the US Dietary Guidelines to promote a more plant-based dietpartly due to concerns about the environmental impact of meat production. Quoted by a 2012 study that doubling the number of vegetarians in the UK would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by almost 28 million tonnes a year, or about 3 per cent of total emissions. As climate change contributes to heart disease, respiratory disease and premature death, this step would also benefit public health. However, the USDA rejected the recommendation.

But about a decade ago, annual U.S. beef consumption bottomed out at about 25 kilograms (54 pounds) per person — roughly the same amount recorded in 1909, the first year the government began collecting data.

Health damage of red meat

Since then, the evidence that red meat can harm our health has only grown. For example, a 2024 study of nearly 149,000 adults found that those who ate two or more servings of processed red meat per day had 29 percent higher risk of heart disease than those who ate less than one serving per week. Meanwhile, people who ate two or more servings of unprocessed red meat a day still had a 14 percent higher risk than those who ate less than one serving a week. Participants were followed for an average of four years and were free of heart disease, cancer and diabetes at the start of the study.

While the saturated fat in red meat was once thought to drive this association, that no longer appears to be the case. A 2022 study of nearly 4,000 American adults age 65 and older found that higher intakes of unprocessed red meat were associated with A 15 percent higher risk of a disease called atherosclerosiswhich hardens the arteries and increases the risk of heart attack and stroke. Crucially, it also showed that a substance called trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) significantly mediated this association.

Gut bacteria produce TMAO when they break down compounds prevalent in red meat, such as choline and L-carnitine. TMAO inflames blood vessels and interferes with the processes that prevent cholesterol from building up in the arteries. He is too participates in the development of colorectal cancerwhich could explain why a 2025 analysis of 60 studies found that consumption of red meat and processed meat was associated with 15 percent and 21 percent greater risk of colorectal cancer, or

“All of these pathways are completely unrelated to saturated fat,” he says Dariush Mozaffarian at Tufts University in Massachusetts, who helped conduct the study in 2022. “So we’re mistakenly telling people to eat lean red meat, when really the problem is other things in red meat.”

The return of beef

While the health risks of red meat are clearer than ever, it’s finding its way onto plates again. Between 2015 and 2021, the most recent year for which data is available, U.S. beef consumption rose nearly 9 percent — and is likely to climb even higher given the country’s updated dietary guidelines. In the meantime, I guess 25 percent of Australians said they would increase their consumption of red meat in 2025, up from less than 10 per cent in 2013. Red meat consumption has in the UK it has fallen steadily since 1980, although some groups, such as young men, have recently reported increases in their income. The reasons for this shift are not entirely clear, but the changing cultural and political environment is almost certainly part of the equation. Consider, for example, the rise of the so-called manosphere, a counter-movement to feminism that emphasizes traditional ideas of masculinity.

“In some circles, red meat is seen as a way to assert strength, dominance and independence — all qualities that are coded as masculine,” she says. Elina Vrijsen at the University of Antwerp, Belgium.

She and her colleagues found that young men often use meat as a way communicate and strengthen your masculinitywhich may explain why red meat consumption is on the rise among Gen Z men. A 2024 survey by British environmental non-profit organization Hubbub found that men aged 16 to 24 were almost three times more likely as the general population has increased their consumption of meat in the last year.

There’s also a cultural obsession with protein, as evidenced by the US government’s updated Dietary Guidelines, which nearly doubled the recommended daily intake: instead of 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight, the guidelines suggest up to 1.6 grams. “This almost doubling has no scientific basis,” says Bleich. “We’re meeting or exceeding what we actually need health-wise in terms of protein, so it doesn’t make sense.”

The USDA’s updated guidelines came after the government rejected recommendations from an independent advisory committee charged with reviewing the scientific evidence on nutrition. The committee he underwent screening for conflicts of interestadvocated a more plant-based diet. Yet President Donald Trump’s administration has violated the norms and she arranged her own committee, partly because of concerns about promoting a plant-based diet. At least four of its nine members had financial ties to the beef and dairy industry.

“We are finally realigning our food system to support America’s farmers, ranchers and companies that grow and produce real food,” said US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. declaration. “Farmers and ranchers are at the forefront of the solution, and that means more protein, dairy products, vegetables, fruits, healthy fats and whole grains on America’s dinner tables.”

It also means overlooking the wealth of evidence linking red meat to heart disease and cancer, not to mention its large carbon footprint.

So what should people trying to follow a healthy diet do with beef? Given the evidence, Straif says there really is no safe amount of processed red meat to eat, and the same is likely true for unprocessed red meat. It may sound shocking to some, but the numbers don’t lie. At the same time, red meat offers other nutrients such as iron, vitamin B12 and zinc, so context matters. “Highly processed foods high in starch, sugar, and salt—you’d be better off eating red meat compared to that,” says Mozaffarian. “On the other hand, there are so many other healthier options than red meat, but that doesn’t mean red meat is the worst choice.”

It’s safe to say that most people get enough protein without increasing their red meat intake. The average person would certainly benefit from eating fewer hamburgers and steaks than they do now—and no one needs to fry a turkey in beef tallow.

topics: