A group of scientists, led by Dr. Chris Bryant from the University of Bath, have challenged the ‘Dublin Declaration’ – a document signed by over 1,000 individuals that claims meat, dairy, and eggs provide essential nutrients and environmental benefits. The scientists argue that the declaration narrowly focuses on benefits from a small minority of livestock while overlooking the clear harms of the majority of livestock for human health and the environment. This commentary, published in Nature Food, dismantles the declaration’s claims and calls for urgent action to curb industrial livestock farming, especially in high-income countries.
Exposing the Biases in the ‘Dublin Declaration’
The ‘Dublin Declaration’ has been scrutinized by a group of scientists, who argue that it narrowly focuses on the benefits of livestock production in the developing world and agroecological systems, while failing to acknowledge the vast majority of livestock that are in higher-income countries and industrial farming systems.
According to Dr. Chris Bryant, an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Bath, ‘The Dublin Declaration overgeneralizes evidence that applies to only 2% of global livestock and fails to acknowledge the serious and acute harms associated with livestock production and consumption at current levels, particularly in high- and upper-middle-income countries, where over 75% of meat is consumed.’
Challenging the Livestock Industry’s Misleading Narrative
The scientists behind the commentary in Nature Food argue that the ‘Dublin Declaration’ was deliberately crafted by livestock industry activists to mislead policymakers into believing that there is no need to cut meat consumption.
Dr. Bryant added, ‘The Dublin Declaration was deliberately crafted by livestock industry activists to mislead policymakers into believing that there is no need to cut meat consumption. Now more than ever, we must face up to the complex challenges surrounding livestock production globally and heed the urgent calls to curb industrial livestock farming in high-income countries.’
The commentary, co-authored by scientists from top global research institutions including the University of Oxford and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, dismantles the Declaration’s argument that reducing meat consumption is unnecessary.
This public rebuttal comes ahead of ‘The Dublin Declaration’ summit in Colorado at the end of October, where the organizers claim they will ‘encourage open, frank, and transparent dialogue among an international audience about what the science says about the role of livestock and meat (including poultry) production in a global society.’
The Urgent Need to Address the Environmental and Health Impacts of Industrial Livestock Farming
The scientists behind the Nature Food commentary argue that it remains crucial that scientific rigor and transparency take precedence over industry-backed narratives, especially when it comes to the pressing challenges of our health, environmental sustainability, and the future of our food systems.
Dr. Bryant emphasizes, ‘It remains crucial that scientific rigor and transparency take precedence over industry-backed narratives, especially when it comes to the pressing challenges of our health, environmental sustainability, and the future of our food systems.’ The commentary highlights the need to curb industrial livestock farming, particularly in high-income countries, to address the complex challenges surrounding global livestock production.
