concept

EAT-Lancet diet

Also known as: EAT-Lancet diet recommendations, EAT-Lancet recommendations

Facts (21)

Sources

How do the indices based on the EAT-Lancet recommendations ... medrxiv.org medRxiv May 14, 2024 20 facts

claimEAT-Lancet recommendations are associated with significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) and land use.

claimAll indices assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations demonstrated unidimensionality and optimal fit, indicating plausible representations of underlying relationships between food components.

claimDemographic differences in EAT-Lancet adherence scores are consistent with previous studies on EAT-Lancet recommendations.

claimThe Brazilian validation study for EAT-Lancet recommendations resulted in almost perfect scores for fruit and vegetable consumption, possibly because the study does not fully reflect the diet of the country.

claimIndices assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations show variations in their correlation with nutritional adequacy.

measurementThe EAT-Lancet Diet Score (ELDS) total score ranges from 0 to 14 points, with higher scores indicating greater adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations.

measurementThe indices based on EAT-Lancet recommendations are generally negatively correlated with the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and 14 individual environmental metrics (highest ρ = −0.33), except for water use and photochemical ozone formation, which showed positive correlations for the WISH and ELI indices.

measurementThe EAT-Lancet Diet Index (ELD-I) yields a continuous unbounded score that can be positive or negative, where higher scores reflect greater alignment with EAT-Lancet recommendations.

measurementThe likelihood of adequacy for fibre, thiamine, folate, vitamin C, and manganese is positively related to all six indices based on EAT-Lancet recommendations, while the likelihood of zinc adequacy is inversely correlated with all six indices.

referenceThe EAT-Lancet Diet Index (ELD-I) assesses the proximity of a diet to the EAT-Lancet reference for 14 food components using a quantitative scoring system.

claimDietary patterns based on EAT-Lancet recommendations may lead to increased water use, which must be considered at national or subnational levels due to existing water stress in many countries.

perspectiveThe authors argue that a consensus should be reached on how to measure adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet recommendations following the launch of the EAT-Lancet diet 2.0 in 2024 to avoid an 'overdevelopment' of indices.

measurementAmong the indices based on EAT-Lancet recommendations, the ELD-I and ELI indices show the highest correlations with environmental impact indicators, while the PHDI index shows the weakest (ρ < −0.10) and least significant coefficients.

referenceThe Healthy and Sustainable Diet Index (HSDI) assesses compliance with EAT-Lancet recommendations using a binary scoring system based on the percentage of energy intake from 13 food components.

claimThe limited concordance among indices assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations is attributed to differences in index design, including components, thresholds, weighting, and scoring systems.

claimThe EAT-Lancet diet recommendations lack precision and clarity regarding specific food groups, particularly in estimating quantities of fats and added sugars, which leads to challenges in operationalization and potential for personal interpretation.

measurementAll indices based on EAT-Lancet recommendations exhibit significant differences between quantiles regarding the PANDiet score, with indices using a quantitative scoring system showing the best performance.

measurementThe six indices based on EAT-Lancet recommendations are positively associated with the Global Diet Quality Score (GDQS) (correlation coefficients between 0.19 and 0.52) and the Comprehensive Diet Quality Index (cDQI) total scores (correlation coefficients between 0.32 and 0.69).

claimThe EAT-Lancet recommendations contain inherent limitations that may result in methodological inconsistencies.

claimThe study found low concordance among indices assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations, despite theoretical expectations of significant correlations.

Sustainable and healthy diet index (SHDI) unveils regional ... link.springer.com Springer Sep 11, 2025 1 fact

referenceEgana Rojas D, Galvez Espinoza P, Rodriguez-Osiac L, and Cerecera Cabalin F published 'EAT-Lancet recommendations and their viability in Chile (2014–2023): a decade-long cost comparison between a healthy and sustainable basket and the basic food basket' in the journal Nutrients in 2025.